So I'm not done with the video so maybe someone brings this up, but I just got to the point where Maria exclaims "He wrote TWELVE books before this?" and I have to clarify. As I understand it, Sanderson wrote 12 books that he couldn't sell to save his life, was about to give up, wrote Mistborn, got an industry friend to get him an in, got a contract, Mistborn wasn't ready by the first deadline so he sent them Elantris instead, published that, and then he published the first Mistborn book as his second published book. Many, many authors write several books before they publish anything, so while 12 is a lot, it's not entirely unheard of. I wrote 5 books before I was comfortable publishing one, and the other 5 are hidden in a deep dark hole, never to see the light of day again.
Still not published... But I've always said I've destroyed more worlds than I've finished. Had a whole world and a language set up, remembered Tolkien was a thing, burned it. 3 or 4 long term projects later, and here I am with Nanowrimo again.
Points of clarification: The first book he sold, Elantris, was actually the fifth book he had written. He wrote 13 novels before selling it (the last one being Way of Kings Prime, which he had given up on publishing when he wrote the first draft). IIRC, Brandon's "industry friend" was Dan Wells, an also unpublished author at the time who randomly plugged Brandon to an editor (Moshe Feder) who happened to already have the Elantris query sitting in his slush pile. (Side Note: Brandon also later plugged one of Dan's books to Moshe, who then bought it as well.) Brandon then got a Mistborn contract. As opposed to missing his Mistborn deadline, Brandon actually finished writing the manuscripts for the whole trilogy prior to publishing book 1. This allowed him to rewrite book 1 based on events in books 2 and 3. After that, he then got a Wheel of Time contract due to Harriet, who read his homage to Robert Jordan and then subsequently read Mistborn. (Note: Her list of prospects for the Wheel of Time job included only Brandon and George R.R. Martin, but Harriet disqualified Martin due to his unfinished ASOIF series, so Brandon won by default. He didn't mind.) Wheel of Time made him popular and he hasn't stopped writing to this day. The rest is history; sorry for my nerdiness.
1:05:20 this whole diatribe is just ridiculous. First, they were only going to send a portion of the army to draw out the garrison so they could invade the city. Not the whole thing. Second, if Kell attacked the Pits by himself, the Lord Ruler wouldn’t send forth the Garrison, he’d send like two inquisitors.
i've watched some of Sanderson lectures and in one he says that he's not a very emotional guy. He literally said that he doesn't have lows and highs he just feels ok all the time.
It's really fascinating to me how the less emotional, more mechanical stuff can actually work so much better for some people. Maybe that facilitates more self-insertion. It's good to know that the conventional wisdom of relying on immersion and mirror neuron stuff isn't the only effective way
I wouldn’t say it helps with self-insertion, I would actually say the opposite. However, as someone who is autistic, it certainly makes understanding the characters and what their going through easier to understand and relate to than simply relying on “the feels” of the narration.
Honestly... I'm 'neurospicy' too (autism and ADHD) and I found Mistborn to be... just fine lmao. It was enjoyable enough overall (book two was a slog though), principally because I went in with very low expectations, but it's nothing amazing. Outside of the magic system, the world-building isn't that good at all, the prose... well, Branderson isn't known for beautiful prose and I believe he admits to this freely. Character work was whatever and theming was very shallow. 🤷♀
This is just a personal take on mistborn (aka the book that got me into cosmere in the first place). It is very formulaic book. It stands to testament that this book feels like the equivalent to the action adventure genre of the 1990s where Sanderson places particular aspects of the plot in a formulaic manner. "Here is our protagonist". "Here is our bad guy." "This is our magic system." "This is our band of crew members." "This is the world we are reading in." "This is the goal this book wants to accomplish." Everything is meticulously calculating that I find it understandable how others do not enjoy this book the way I do. But ironically the mistborn series is the one novel series I can read it like its a movie transcribed rather than a novel because of the barebones formula sanderson went for to write this. I've yet to finish listening to the podcast, but as far as I've seen from your takes, its a fair criticism in the points you've mentioned.
I'm autistic and I have the opposite feeling towards BrandoSando's work than Gina (not to say she's wrong, it's just putting the "divergence" in neurodivergence). I haven't read Mistborn, but I did get through half of Way of Kings and two-thirds of his Wheel of Time contributions, and I couldn't connect to any of the characters because they were so shallow. Even characters that I was familiar with through WoT, it was like the bulk of their personality had been removed and replaced with cliff notes versions. (And don't get me started on the glorified self-insert he added who ended up with more POV time in three books than a massive chunk of the female POV characters *in the combined series*). And without that connection to the characters, the plot felt very flat and distant. I didn't really care about what was happening to the world because none of it felt real. I like intricate worldbuilding and magic systems, but I need the emotional connection to enjoy a story (it's basically how I learned to emote as an undiagnosed kid afterall 😅)
I'm at 14 minutes and I want to read this book before going on. The best part about this podcast so far is that you all have different opinions on what makes the book good or not but that you agree on a fundamental level. You guys are great. Argue like siblings and stay friends!
You mentioned at one point that it felt odd this was a culture that had existed for 1000 years but you couldn't really feel it, and it was just like medieval Europe, still. This is one of my problems with the Song of Ice and Fire world (no need to take a shot because this is a criticism). The Wall was built *8000* years ago. What did *our* world look like 8000 years ago? Even if you want to say there was in-fighting, wars, repression, etc.--a culture with at least 8000 years of history should have some technological advancements beyond horses and ravens. A common person, doing laundry every single day, will eventually get sick of doing it by hand and someone will build a washing machine.
In this book, it is later revealed/explained that the Lord Ruler was, for some reason, intentionally holding the populace back, beyond even his manipulation of the orbit and climate. Within a century after the end of what seems like the bronze age after the third book, people are making guns and blimps, and while I don't know what Sanderson's planned timeline scale is, he's going to write 6 more books on the same planet with more and more advanced tech.
This is an old comment but I feel the need to note that GRRM himself has said many times that this is an issue he is very conscious of. There are other inconsistencies beyond that as well like how the houses survived for thousands of years without rebellion, or how the Targ’s family tree is so small(even with the inbreeding). The difference though, is that the way the world of ASOIAF is built and written within the books makes these inconsistencies feel less jarring and more fluid in the story.
Gina's point is so interesting because I'm AUDHD and I read over 100 pages of this and got so bored bc I do need to connect emotionally with my characters and this was worldbuilding/pot driven and character felt like an afterthought to me, but I do feel things intensely and pick up on emotional shallowness very quickly, which I felt with these characters and the author's voice. It felt very sanitized and again, boring to me.
I feel the exact same way. I read it a couple years back so I can't really remember the details, but I remember the main characters mentor dying and me not feeling a damn thing about it. I'd definitely describe it as sanitized.
Me too but I couldn’t even get further than two or three chapters into the book. I wanted to read Brando Sando but he just couldn’t catch my attention and keep me hooked. I didn’t even catch that it was an apartheid society 😅 And I’m the kind of reader who once I’m hooked I won’t stop until I’m finished, even if I have to stay awake until 5am to do it, so I was hoping I’d like his stuff but so far I don’t
Ooooh another AuDHD POV! I felt the same way when I tried to read Warbreaker. The worldbuilding/plot wasn't interesting enough to keep me engaged and the characters felt very standoffish. There was a level of detachment where I was struggling to keep reading because I didn't care about anyone. And I thought the magic system was stupid AF. I didn't even make it to 100 pages, though, so respect to you!
Precisely my thoughts. I think it’s part of the reason I really struggle with high fantasy books in general since most of them are world building heavy. Authors go to great lengths to flesh out centuries of elaborate histories for their stories, much of it not really relevant to the current story (or at least not relevant enough for me), which a lot of people actually really enjoy! For me, it’s just like reading a textbook. I remember desperately trying to get through LOTR because it’s a favorite in my family. I finally gave up around the chapter with the talking trees. After the fifth time rewinding the audio book i realized it probably just wasn’t for me and that’s okay. It doesn’t make it any less of a fantastic series for people who enjoy it, but there’s books better suited for me.
I think everyone has different suspensions of disbelief that get them to fall out of reading a book. I grew up on fantasy/anime series so many elements aren't jarring to me. Whenever Romace is thrown in that not very obvious, and fowardly cliché, I do find it jarring, because my experience with those elements are very surface level.
Some people like Rembrandt, some people like Monet, some people like Picasso, and some people like Rothko. I can understand two of those four groups of people. Same thing goes for writing styles. I read Sanderson books mostly for the intricately-crafted magic systems. His works feel like fantasy stories told through a hard science fiction lens. It's also worth noting that Sanderson's works have a lot in common with Jordan's: the individual books in a series add up to more than the sum of their parts. E.g., there are things that happen in Mistborn that take on new meaning once you've finished Hero of Ages. And, here's the important thing: THAT is a huge part of the appeal for many (most?) Sanderson fans. It's like comparing episodic TV from the 70s and 80s to modern shows with their inticate webs of multi-season story arcs.
Agreed with Will. On paper, it's FINE. Sanderson is competent at story-crafting. His world-building is shallow but present. He does get better at it over time, but I think his biggest weakness is that his characters lack personality and nuance. Sanderson very much plots out the narratives well in advance, so the characters generally must adhere to the story he's telling rather than their own gravitas. Actions and motivations feel somewhat staged because of it, and too much happens off-screen. Again, he does address some of this over time, more thought is put into the emotional weight of scenes, etc., but I don't think he'll ever be more than mediocre. His philosophies on writing won't allow for it because he writes to be successful. That comes first. He has cool ideas and concepts, but the execution isn't exceptional because he MUST adhere to his formula. Getting into the nuanced implications of the concepts he's exploring isn't what he's interested in. He just wants to tell cool stories and highlight the nerdy stuff he finds fascinating. Which is FINE. He has found an audience for that and good on him for making his dream come true. At least Sanderson is capable of making a cohesive narrative. I can turn my brain off and read Sanderson knowing what I'm going to get. It's not terrible. It's straightforward. Everything makes sense (mostly). He tends to keep a decent pace and knows how to ramp up the stakes. It's not entirely predictable/twists feel earned. The same cannot be said for a lot of new authors in the fantasy space. I feel that's part of the reason why Sanderson is popular. There's a lot worse out there, and he produces content regularly that's not difficult to read, his narratives don't despense with much nonsense, and he doesn't emphasize romance or write like a fanfic author. I can appreciate that for what it is. I know there's a lot of folks that are die-hard Sanderson fans, but I'd wager there's just as many who view his books as I do. Not my faves but they're readable.
Sanderson read one of his books on his channel. I listened for about 15 minutes and knew that his writing style is not for me. It just lacked something. Many love his books, but it's just not for me.
I'd actually be really interested in your thoughts on his later works and then compare them to Mistborn such as Stormlight Archives and his stand alone books like Yumi and the nightmare painter, etc.
I feel like I’m the only one in the world who just can’t jive with BrandoSando’s writing style but you guys nailed my feelings about his work right on the head lol. I feel very seen.
It’s a common thing right to his face. He does it purposely. And now he is the most popular fantasy writer. I recommend to you Steven Erikson with Malazan Book of the Fallen. That’s how you do it. But also that’s how we read it. 😂
Well, I just became a fan of this podcast as of 38:16. The way the guy (William?) goes into detail about Sanderson’s limited viewpoint affecting his writing on women. I think it also applies to other topics that come up in his books like sex, racism, or classism and William echoed how I felt reading this and Warbreaker. I feel that Sanderson doesn’t really get these topics on deeper levels and so his writing on them is so boring and surface level.
I actually really like this book and it works for me! -but the criticism here is valid and I appreciate the conversation being had. Of all Sanderson’s works I’ve read, the ones that find myself wanting reread (and therefore I suppose are my favorites) are the first 2 Stormlight books and Warbreaker (this one is a little older so I’m interested to go back to it and see if it has some of the same things you talked about here.)
Really interesting, so glad I found your channel! Although I fall closer to Will and Maria on most of the takes, I'm on Gina's side with the magic system. I think what makes it interesting is that it IS so simple and boring on the face of what the powers can do, but then uses that small set of minor powers as tools to build a more complex result. Most of the metals are useful on their own in a very limited way: pushing and pulling, heightened senses, getting stronger, hiding your powerful friends, persuading people. Modest, practical advantages. The cool part is combining them into something flashier that depends on each component as a distinct part of the system. "Flight" may be one of the most basic magic/super powers in media, but for a reader who likes to see how the mechanics work and play off of each other, using "push stuff+strength+senses" to get to *flying through the air by bouncing off coins you throw at the ground while invisible to everyone else because you have darkvision and landing from hundreds of feet in the air without shattering your bones* is pretty cool. I like a D&D spell as much as the next guy, but there's also something compelling about a building-block style of magic you can follow along with like a recipe.
Sanderson once mentioned that one of his early unpublished novels was an attempt to write grimdark because publishers were looking for more GRRM. The magic system of that book was repurposed for mistborn. I suspect that's why it feels like it is a grimdark setting by the wrong author.
Yeah, as a fantasy author, she is on the other end of the spectrum as far as her depiction of emotions and the readers' closeness to her characters go. I definitely think she would be an interesting author for them to read next.
Hell no, her books are too long/slow. Just because she is on the opposite end of the spectrum regarding plot vs character focus doesn't mean she does it in an engaging way. I read Fool's Assassin and felt trapped inside Fitz's head, he was so goddamn passive and the detail to the characters' thoughts and emotions felt so drawn-out, so melodramatic, so performative and unconvincing... Similar to the way SJM (over)writes emotions, even though their stories are very different. And a common criticism with Hobb's writing is her slow pacing which definitely was the case in that book.
I'm only three and a half minutes in but I wanted to comment on Brandon's writing habits: Brandon is a very competent lecturer on writing novels. He has three different iterations of his class on writing somewhere on RUclips and he openly says that with all the books before the ones that got published he was not a revision girlie (not a direct quote). Apparently he'd go through a first draft he'd just written and go "oh there's all these mistakes; I'll just fix them in the next book I write." So yes, twelfth book in that he probably kinda understands how to make the words come out and he probably has a good system in place for doing things and it probably means that he's got good ground work going in as far as assessing story structure and designing magic systems and worlds and whatnot, but I think Mistborn might've been the second book he'd actually sat down and thoroughly revised the way we think of books as almost universally needing revision in order to turn a first draft into a passable product. That said, I never read Mistborn because he never dropped any interesting lore about character design that I wanted to see in a book. The Way of Kings has a character that he actually had to split into two to make the story work and that was a very academically compelling concept to me. It also, for the record, has a much more tolerable female to male ratio.
I also fall into the category that I felt as a fantasy reader, I should try Sanderson, but only got about 100 pages into Mistborn before DNFing it. The characters felt incredibly distant and I did not care for any of them. I distinctly remember the first(?) meeting of Vyn and one of the royals, where she notices that he has a book among others about weather patterns with a very long title. And it's later revealed that that is actually a cover for for "rebellious writing" and that whole ordeal of getting to the point of it and the explanation was so outdrawn and clunky, that it became my breaking point. I agree with the sentiment that the "neurospicy" comment was generalizing in a very frustrating way, as neurodivergent person. I found the patterns that built the story of this book annoyingly visible. I can still see people enjoying this type of story, like evyerbody has different preferences, but i feel like the thought of making the enjoyment of it a case of "neurodivergent readers vs. neurotypical readers" is misplaced.
Yeah I wrote a comment about how too many people are using “Neurospicy” “Neurodivergent” like it’s a horoscope. Your ADHD/Autism is not mine and a diagnosis doesn’t create a personality or personal preference for writing styles. Certain aspects can connect better but it is becoming so generalized that it’s actually excluding the community.
Same. Quit after about 100 pages. I just felt nothing throughout. To be fair, I am not a fantasy reader, I picked up Mistborn out of curiosity after I kept hearing about Sanderson, but I usually can get some entertainment out of any genre if done in an engaging way. This one just did nothing for me whatsoever.
ffs - are you "triggered?" This whole "neuro-divergent" now applies to anybody with any phobia of any sort, and bad habits from not making the bed to not washing their ass in the shower. Calling his writing fomulaic at best is one thing. But getting triggered over this term is ridiculous. By today's standard, self-diagnosis, mainly through some form of oppression-lens and victim-stacking, everybody is "neuro-spicy." But be frustrated, and add a smiley face on the board next to your name for not only spotlighting yet _another_ problem with speech, but for including yourself in the stack... lmao
I think the grand cosmere series is really good. Even though the people say to start with mistborn, I didn't, my friends didn't and I wouldn't recommend it first. Way of Kings was better for me because I like slow paced books. Elantris and warbreaker has some great starting points too. I even know someone who got into it but reading white sand 👀. Mistborn isn't the best starting point.
I read this book not long ago at the request of my sister, who loved it. Before that I had tried going through it several times but always stopped at the moment Vin and the crew is introduced. Not because of Vin herself but because after Vin, I thought: "Oh these are all the major characters and I feel nothing for anyone of them." This time, I forced myself to finish. I agree with what Maria and Will are saying. There is a certain 'dullness' to the book. That lack of 'atmosphere' that you guys talked about. I remember reading the prologue with the horrible treatment of slaves and a world long in decline and thinking, "I should care more about this. Why don't I?!" That's because nothing about the prose or the scene or the dialogue made me feel like I was doing anything more than reading words on paper. The colors did not invoke emotion, the verb choice did not make me feel the violence, the descriptions did not move me. It felt much like an elaborate review that tried its hardest to be unbiased in its recollection of the story. But book characters are meant to be biased! If you walk through their perspective and remain indifferent in prose, then I will remain indifferent to the character! I thought about this more deeply after watching your review and hearing Gina's comments. So I suggested this book to a friend with alexithymia. He isn't a person who enjoys reading, but this one he really loved. And from the way he explained it then, it is exactly what I was dissatisfied with that he enjoyed. For him, most every other book was verbose to the point of tears. Describing emotions, for him who had a hard time connecting or understanding them, was an immediate shock that brought him out of the story. Having subtext through colors, sounds or atmosphere may have as well been a writer's way of trying to draw a movie and failing by overfocusing on the details. He explained it better, I think, but that's what I got. I think, Sanderson's writing really speaks to those who prefer a direct approach and who really hated explaining metaphors in high school. "Less is more," for them, not because of the number of words but because the words themselves cannot be misinterpreted, misunderstood, or read in ways other than the word itself. Where I feel disengaged because of the lack of depth and colors, they feel engaged because they can transfer their own emotions and their own colors more easily when facing a world of whites and grays. They, the readers, make the world 3D, not the book itself. Anyway, that is how I think about it. I wouldn't call the book bad or the characters bad in any way. It is very much a good book. Like... to the dot. I can't think of a single book written in such an evidence-based way that can prove itself good. Very formulaic, as you guys said. But formulas work for a reason. It simply offers a very mediocre reading experience for readers who have long been used to 'colors'. For others, I am happy they found a writer and a book who can touch them so much. Sorry for the overly long comment. I just had a lot of thoughts about it when I read it, and barely anyone online 'confessed' to an experience like mine with this book, so I was outrageously happy to find you guys. Thanks a lot!
I read this trilogy like a month ago and felt the same way as Will and Maria. Agree with pretty much everything they said. But since it's so universally praised, it made me feel crazy. Unfortunately, I think it only goes downhill after the first book. I loved this discussion and I'm glad I found this podcast!
I liked this book, though one of my lasting impressions of it is how its subtle sexism resembles the kind of sexism I deal with in my life. Yet, despite my looking for reviews discussing this particular facet of the book(s in the trilogy), I can't seem to find any. Perhaps I have not looked hard enough, or perhaps this is because people expect there to be invisible sexism in this Christian-coded fantasy, and as such, they are likely to view the book as progressive because of Vin being a main character and because of who the author is. I don't know, this is my speculation. I do know that I have a review typed and ready where I discuss subtle/benign sexism, and how people are willing to pass it off as unimportant because there are more obvious and more egregious examples to crack down on. The reason why this book is so interesting is because its portrayal of female identity is extremely normative. On a surface level, Vin breaks the mold, yet her entire personal arc is about her relationship with her femininity and whether or not she has earned the right to be a "real" woman (and as such, earn her place next to her man). I have not posted this review anywhere out of fear. Knowing what the fandom is like, despite BrandoSando seemingly being a nice guy who advocates tolerance and understanding, I doubt I ever will. This was a good episode, I'm excited to see our RUGGEDLY HANDSOME hosts read and discuss some of the heavy hitters of the genre so cheers for picking it.
Maybe. I think the sexism in thjs book if anything comes from the overall problem if flat characterization AND the mean girl bully plot. Vin almost comes across as a bit of a pick me girl when posed against the caricature mean girl of the book (who, of course, also is her rival in love and a mistborn like herself.)
Loved the video, been a long time follower, and I did enjoy having Gina here, but I have to say CAN WE STOP USING NEURODIVERGENT LIKE IT’S A HOROSCOPE. Too often it’s like“neurospicy” could be swapped out with Scorpio via saying, “As a Scorpio this just connected better for me than it would for a Libra”. STOP IT. With love to my community we need to articulate why something hits different for *their* neurodivergence rather than generalizing a statement like I keep seeing. I did really like when Maria said you could get 3 people with ADHD and they will all experience the same thing differently.
Totally agree with you on this one. I have autism, but as a reader I agree way more with Will and Maria on this one. Sanderson is quite bland to me, because to me he lacks depth and undertones, both in the prose, in the characters, and in the worldbuilding. Opinions on this has nothing to do with being neurodivergent, but rather what type of reader you are. Just like everyone born in December are not the same, neurodivergent doesn't mean being part of a hivemind where everyone's the same.
@@jo_helaciTrue, I'm also autistic and lots of autistic people have special interests that are very different from each other. I only had met one autistic person similar to me, the others were so different that I couldn't connect with them.
I've barely started this video yet but I'm so glad you're doing this! I tried. I did my best okay. I got Mistborn on Audible and I just couldn't get through it. Same, recently, with Red Rising and Age of Myth...I lost focus on all of them.
I have tried so hard. When you are a fantasy reader everyone wants you to read Sanderson. And I just cannot. I am 4 books in and I still hate worldbuilding(yeah I know, I know). The only thing I actually enjoyed is the magic mechanics even tho I am usually not a hard magic kinda person
I am the same way. I have tried to read mistborn on paper, on e-book, via audiobook. I genuinely believe that Sanderson is a good writer, but I just don't care, man. Shut up and tell me a story!
If you feel compelled to still give his writing a chance I would say go for his standalones. Don't put yourself through behemoth series that are not working for you!! 🥺For all that I enjoy Brandon Sanderson, no writer is worth that kind of drudgery!! 😂 Warbreaker, Tress of the Emerald Sea, and Yumi and the Nightmare Painter are three of his most beloved standalones.
Its funny they pitched the idea of a writing system only people with magic can read because that actually exists in another one of his works, Warbreaker. People with greater magical power are able to see a much wider and detailed spectrum of colours so a new writing system based on colours was made. The exact shade of each colour is so small that a normal person has no way of reading or writing it
How do you manage do that? I've tried writing with people talking, and I find it really hard. I can do that while drawing or playing videogames, but I feel like I need to audiate the words of my writing. Though I'd love to be able to write while listening to people talk, because in theory, I wouldn't have to get bored and wander, because something entertaining is going on in the background. Any tips on how you do it?
@@metalman4393 Something to keep in mind is that I have been multitasking like this since I was a child and I have unmedicated ADHD. Another important thing to note is that I do still have to pause the video at times because it does become too distracting sometimes. That being said my advice: I try to stick to videos/movies/tv shows that I've seen so much that I can jump back in at any time and still know exactly what's going on. This makes it easier to tune out enough to focus on my task at hand while still having it be background fodder. I also do this with creators/podcasts that I know I like as well. I like the way that Maria and Will deliver information and their opinions again lending that sense of comfort and ease where I don't feel like I HAVE to stay tuned in at all seconds of the video. Because for the most part I can again tune in and out and still (mostly) keep track of what's happening. Some days this is easier than others. Some days I can't have anything playing while I write because I can't focus. I really just access on a day-to-day basis what my ADHD will and won't allow for. This is all just personal conjuncture so take what I've said with a grain of salt. But I hope this helped.
@@A_Bookish_Obsession I tried it, and it was alright. Though 300 words in 2 hours is nothing to write home about, I think it's still better than procrastinating.
About the tonal issues; All of the things you mentioned are perfectly valid as preferences, but do seem intentional, or at least he was aware of them. Kelsier's main character trait that is brought up over and over, even after he is removed from the main story, is that he is always trying to smile and brighten the world of the skaa. He despises that 90% of the population, and "his people" (despite the weirdness there) are completely despondent and hopeless. It would, I think, be pretty unsettling if his crew was just as downtrodden and unproductively angry at the world as everyone else. The text takes place in two extreme outlier perspectives, of a noblewoman and a revolutionary, so the fact that there is more jovial and hopeful scenes works for me. Also, I believe sanderson has said at some point that some of his writing at the time was filtered through a distaste for the trendy grimdark stuff, so he probably pushed himself even further to avoid that. Finally, I really don't feel that the tone is overly dissonant or jarring, because even when people are at their happiest, they still live in a world of ash and slavery. Many of the characters are deeply, obviously mentally ill, and there isnt as much of an outlet from it as with his longer, more famous series.
I am fascinated to hear your thoughts. If you like it will finally understand what people like in these books, if you don't I will finally feel not alone. My biggest gripe is that 3 books in I still felt like barely know any one the characters apart from maybe the main character. They are great sketches of characters, but they somehow never became full people for me.
I think the issue is that "Final Empire" itself is a more simplistic story and IS one of his first hits in his Cosmere world. Mistborn is decent, but strictly to be read as a heist story and for the fun magic system. Mistborn era 1 itself doesn't stand as much on its own, as it serves as a major pillar holding up the rest of the cosmere at this point. The events themselves are very important to the overall series but GETTING there can be a drag.
I DNF this...describing the way the magic worked for me was jarring, the action scenes were like he was describing playing a video game and I found the prose sterile and the character interactions boring...still can't understand the hype around it.
I'm only about half an hour into the discussion but it brings up why I didn't quite connect with the main character in Sanderson's Skyward (spoilers ahead) because the general lack of describing or lingering in the internal emotional landscape of the character and what they're going through. While I did enjoy the story very much, I'm someone that also really enjoys feeling the angst of a character, and one moment in the Skyward book towards the end felt like a missed opportunity to really dive into the main character's head - that is, the point when the aliens can make people see friends as enemies or see things that aren't there/hallucinate a scenario that causes them to attack allies irl. In fiction that is a moment that has a lot of potential to make a reader feel the character's horror from their POV, but the scene went by in a sentence or two.
I used to listen to his writing podcast and he comapired his writing style to windows. Some people have an ornate or flowery writing style that he compared to stain glass windows - the windows are beautiful in themself but they can ofuscate the view (which in this analogy is the story). His says that his writing style is like a plain glass window, which is deliberately bare bones to not distract from the view (his story). I think this goes to show who here at UTT like stained glass and who like an unobstructed view. And... I say this having never read his books.
I felt like I was reading an outline with this first book. It was so straight forward I was calling plot beats before they happened and absolutely nothing caught me off guard except for the end - because it made no sense whatsoever. Most of the plot felt disjointed like 'this thing needs to happen at this point, but idk how to get there organically, so it just happens because the plot needs it to happen' - this was HUGE when it came to Vin meeting Elend and just....giving him tons of info that was top secret after she just met him??? For what reason??? Plot needed to progress and Elend needed to know that info in order for future scenes to make sense. I feel like Sanderson gets a really cool idea for the end point of a story and then tries to reverse engineer a world to fit that idea, but it just does not work at all (at least for me). The entire series feels like it's retconning in real time to make anything make any sort of sense, then he tells you to feel a certain way about something but everything around it is like....ummmm no. Just because you're telling me I should feel like 'x' thing was justified or that 'y' thing was necessary or that 'z' thing actually fits with the rules of the world doesn't make it so. Same with the 'grim-dark' ness of the setting - he wants the trappings of grim dark without the actual depth GOOD grim-dark explores which comes off as shallow and perfunctory to the point of being disgustingly harmful when you think about real-life oppression (later finding out that he was Mormon makes all this make so much more sense) As a 'neuro-spicy' person who likes it when authors spell out the thought process and emotions of the characters rather than just expecting us to know all the intricacies of that through unspoken means, I get what Gina is saying about Sanderson's writing style, but that doesn't mean what he's depicting with that style is good. Every single character is so bland and 'perfect' with no flaws, no faults (other than the annoying 'I care TOO MUCH!! I'm TOO SELF SACRIFICING' bullshit) and everything just works out perfectly - the 'failures' aren't really failures at all because there's never a cost (other than the ones they already knew were coming and agreed to). Vin is just a perfect little Mary Sue (said knowing full well the firestorm that comment brings) but instead of doing something interesting with that, Sanderson just...doesn't. He set up the world to be morally gray and verging on grim dark yet no one is actually gray at all - even those characters we think in this book might have hints of it later on are revealed to have been perfect saints too! With Vin's whole 'everyone will betray you' thing, turns out, no one ever betrays her even a little nor did they EVER betray her!! The issue for me wasn't the 'lack of emotionallity' it was the content of what Sanderson told me in no uncertain terms. I'd be interested to see if Will's opinion that the book wasn't really /saying/ anything changes if he reads the last two books because I felt the same way about book 1, then the next two books really fleshed out that Sanderson was definitely saying something, but it was so abhorrently antithetical to all my morals that I almost wish he'd missed the mark entirely and his books were just accidentally pushing really bad politics rather than him hammering home with no nuance 'nope, this is what you should be taking from this book: this horrifically disgusting theme that I'm telling you is good, actually'. I think bringing up Wheel of Time really shoots Gina in the foot, though, because Robert Jordan actually worldbuilds and has diversity and depth in his world, cultures, sub-cultures, and the types of characters he writes. His world actually shows the consequences of past actions and how cultures intertwine due to the history of the world and you get that starting in book 1. Obviously worlds deepen the more you read about them, but Will and Maria are right: Sanderson's worldbuilding, even in book 1, could have had actual depth rather than the veneer of intricacy which is all actually just window-dressing. (Also, books 2 and 3 don't make the worldbuilding better, it makes it much, much worse). I think Gina was missing their point that after 1,000 years of this new atmosphere and world structure, that would influence things, the world wouldn't look like our world plus magic - it felt like Gina was thinking they wanted more lore when really, what they wanted was for the world to feel deeper than set dressing. Suffice it to say, I forced myself to finish this trilogy, hated what Sanderson believes with my entire soul, and will never pick up another Sanderson book ever again. (and the utter LACK of female characters???? Honestly unforgivable)
2 things: Please tell me you don’t like red rising. What is it about Brandon’s beliefs that he expressed within the book that you hate so much? I’m not a fan of Mormonism but I didn’t see any in the book lol
@@NotYourCitizenAnymore 1) Never read Red Rising. 2) The end of book 2 and the entirety of book 3 is full-hog "Well, you gotta give it to Hitler, actually" when no, no you really do not. The Lord Ruler was disgusting - we do not need to spend every single waking second 'thanking' him for his twisted 'help' for a problem he himself caused. He literally remade the world - there was no reason to create any of the monsters the way he did, there was no reason for him to castrate an entire race and control their reproduction, there was no reason to create a permanent underclass, there was no reason to create an entire people who would all commit mass suicide when he told them to, there was no reason to only have your magic be awoken by lethal physical abuse, there was no reason to create the koloss at all. It again, felt like Sanderson had a cool idea for a setting and tried to reverse-engineer it to make sense, but it just...doesn't make sense whatsoever. If he had left it at that and not tried to moralize it and tell the reader 'see, the Lord Ruler wasn't actually all bad after all!' then it might have been slightly better, but the villain would still have been a maniacally flat evil person who tortured people for fun but at least I wouldn't be horrified that Sanderson keeps trying to tell us all those things were 'justified, actually'. And that's not taking into consideration his deplorable writing of women where out of the total of 4, one is an annoying know-it-all who thinks she knows how to run a kingdom because she's read some biographies and then dies to further a man's character, one is just there to warm the bed of an old man and get her daddy to send his army where her old man boyfriend needs it, one was only there to bring a man back from madness, and the other was the super OP main character who killed herself because her husband died.
@@Neremworld just because I had just finished that book and thought it was so terrible and yet so praised like they are saying about Mistborn. Was looking for someone to agree with me about Red rising because it seems harder to find criticism of that story 🤣
Honestly, I think the one place that Brandon dropped the ball in this series was when he introduced compounding. I think that basically breaks the magic system and makes it way too overpowered. Like, a steel compounder would literally be like Quicksilver from X-Men, gold compounders are literally invincible, etc.
Excited you guys are doing Mistborn! I figured out pretty early on that Brandon Sanderson's writing style just isn't for me and it was great to understand why through your review. It was also great to hear that the story worked for Gina. I would've liked to understand why because I'm open to being convinced that I didn't see everything good about a story, but I left feeling that if you liked the book then great, but if not, there's nothing really tangible that will change your mind besides the purely subjective experience of it. It was much easier to understand why Will and Maria didn't like the book than why Gina did.
Completely agree. I am fascinated by the mistborn hyoe because I really dont get it, but I really want to understand why its so welliked even by usually critical readers.
I started reading stormlight archive FIRST and then likw halfway through the books read Mistborn because I i throughly enjoyed myself and wanted to try other stuff Sanderson had done. Throughly disappointed. Just luke they said it was fine and i felt nothing as nd no drive to keep with the sage. It's very interesting to see how much growth Sanderson had between his different works. I'm so curious as to the experience people who read the "right way" had?
I’d be really interested to see your guy’s thoughts on the rest of the series or any of Brandon’s other books. I liked the first one well enough but my enjoyment fell off really hard during the second and third while most people think they get progressively much better. Mistborn era 2 was also a big disappointment imo. I’ve come to realize I’m not really a Sanderson fan I’m just a Stormlight Archive fan, the difference between those series is night and day I don’t understand how anyone thinks Mistborn is better than or even close to Stormlight quality unless they’re coming at it purely from a place of personal preference. Would love to see you read Stormlight someday, maybe by 2030 lmao
I'm not sure why exactly stuff like D&D magic that just does stuff because it can, is different from this metal magic system. As explained it seems not to be tied to things actually connected to the properties of the metal itself...so it is in fact just doing things just because it can. It just has a middle step involved where some guy shoves metal down his throat. Neither are better but it seems like they are virtually the same exact thing.
You don't have to read this if you care at all about spoilers, but Within the isolated world of mistborn (Scadrial) the power system(s) were created by vessels of deific power that alters their perceptions and thoughts. The powers are linked to the metals based on the choices of a very old god, versus every magic spell being described as a "manipulation of the weave". The metals are used as "keys" to allow the user to tap the omnipresent power of Preservation to achieve various results.
I think there was change in plan, like he had planned to kill the nobles, but then he changed his mind cuz of vin. They taught each other things. Saying there was no development would be wrong
I’d be curious to know if there’s a correlation between a reader’s phantasia (vividness of mind visualization/imagery, on the scale of aphantasia to hyperphantasia) and their desired level of emotionality within a text.
Heres my experience: I struggle to imagine environments and visuals, but I am extremely good at picking up emotional subtext. I like when visuals are described to me in detail. I hate, however, when thoughts and emotions are overtly stated and explained.
I know this is a long video and i'm totally nitpicking, but Will is constantly asking for more writing and consideration on material conditions and then he says "i'm not sure why the city skaa are so different from the plantation skaa". I don't even know how to respond to that, besides pointing out that being literally whipped as you work is less empowering than being able to steal or con or work on your own.
I really enjoyed Mistborn. It's not my favorite Sanderson novel, nor my favorite series, but it holds a special place in my heart. I disagree with some of the points being presented here, but I feel it's just a matter of taste.
LOL, no, Will, you're spot on about Sanderson being Mormon (or LDS) and having a limited view/understanding of the world and how it actually works, especially since Mistborn was published almost two decades ago. I know from personal experience.
I completely understand why it it doesn't occur to most people, even other POC because it's not even a common term heard in historical media. But spook was used in the US as a racial slur for black people. And its just so jarring to reading about a lovable little boy in a scene and then just a casual slur as a nickname jump out every couple sentences and a term of endearment and familiarity.
Yeah this is a slur I've heard before and it was really jarring. I think the reason people brush past it is because all members of the crew have nicknames of that flavour, so it just hides among them (along with the fact that he is white). But when you know, it is impossible not to see, especially with him also speaking a dialect most people can't understand.
this whole video summed up my biggest issue with The Way of Kings; you gave me the words to say what I really didn't like about that book - the straightforwardness makes everything aggressively okay. I wasn't moved, and I didn't particularly care about anything in the book. Not the magic system, not the characters, and certainly not the plot. After 260 pages, I was ready to admit maybe I'm just not a Sanderson girlie. I felt absolutely nothing and just gave up, and haven't picked up another Sanderson book since.
You are probably correct, it's not for you. For example every time I go back to a Sanderson novel, I feel very good reading it because it feels like I'm back to a comfy place where things are stated simply and I can just focus on the plot and characters. On the opposite end of the spectrum there is the Kingkiller Chronicles where every time I read a book, I feel drained because there is a disconnect between the quality of the prose and what actually happens in the plot. I always come out of them feeling like I just read something great, but I could never praise a scene for having stuck with me so I also feel cheated in a sense. The Wise Man's Fear in particular gave me this impression that the prose bamboozled me into enjoying a pretty bland story. Sanderson's prose feels comfy to me in comparison.
Sanderson painting grisaille, but forgetting to add color cause he's colorblind. Also, on his skill level, just because he did something intentionally doesn't mean his writing is good. I feel like most books that are poorly realized are published on purpose/the writer didn't have the technique or skills to portay the tale more effectively.
For me the whole mistborn trilogy- and it gets worse as it goes along - shows waaaaaaaay too much of the author's hand it didn't feel like I was reading a story anymore. When I found out he was a mormon man I was like, yeah I could guess that real easy, and also I walked away feeling like I had some really disturbing revelations about how certain people view the world that I would never want to see through their eyes again. The strings being pulled behind the scene were painfully visible to the point of being difficult to enjoy characters or see their actions as character actions and the world was being constructed rather than existing. I think that's the best way I can put it? I'd never been so painfully aware a story was being told by another person before. I know it was like the first book he actually wrote even if it wasn't the first he's published and he's changed a lot as a person since, but except for one character that doesn't show up till book 2... yeah... I did have another character I really liked but Sanderson's insistence on pairing everyone up into the most forced heteronormative straight couple relationships when he can't write romance to save his life put a reeeaaal damper on that despite adoring both them and their love interest separately. I also foudn the 'subversive' aspect of it really shallow where it was like i was still reading the exact sorta story it was trying to subvert. I dunno if that was his intention or just a marketing gimmick, though.
I read these books years ago and I remember liking them but also thinking they were dense and too long my brain just skipped over the exposition training sequences and out of the three books my favorite character is Tensoon the "dog"
These were my least favorite Sanderson books. It took me like 2 years to get through Mistborn and I honestly only did because I broke down and got the audiobook 😭 I loved Elantris and Warbreaker tho & I’m enjoying the Stormlight Archive 😅
Sanderfans always argue you just need to read one more book and then you’ll ‘get it’. I fell into their trap and read the whole trilogy. It only gets worse! 🫠🫠🫠
God shalow worldbuilding by the 3rd book it was so bad I had to take breaks to rant to friends. Still waited for it to click in to place at the end of a trilogy. And it made less and less sense.
As someone who knew 0 opinions on the mistborn books prior to reading I’m a bit over half way through the well of ascension rn and I think its demonstrably better than the final empire was lol
It`s like saying Tolkien is bad at world building, because someone read only the Hobbit. Let`s judge why the world is like that without finishing the trilogy to understand why really it`s like that, because there is a reason. You have the right not to like it, in that case if you want something magical comming out of the blue, just so you feel entertained, go read Alice in Wonderland. If you don`t want to read a trilogy, why start it? It`s not a trap.
Nice review guys. I never really looked at Mistborn as critically as y'all, since it's among the stories I liked more. I found William's views interesting, though mine are the opposite. Strangely enough, even as a non-religous atheist, who finds faith-pandering distasteful in fiction, I thought it was done well here, with a message that even a secular person can relate to. *SPOILER* The Christification of Kelsier was an excellent illustration of how a mythology may've been built, which has been kind of the theme of this whole book series, a.k.a "there is _some_ truth to every religion." If we were to overlap Kelsier's tale with that of Jesus, giving the observers of his alleged resurrection the benefit of the doubt, I think Sanderson is exploring the possibility of "maybe the people saw someone else instead of the risen Christ, that made them believe their saviour had returned." Of course, there's no Kandra magic or divine necromancy IRL, in so far as we can tell, but there may yet be alternate explanations to historical beliefs, lost to the ravages of time, and generations of indoctrination. Or it's all made-up.
I heard (but can't guarantee that it's true) that originally he was writing it Grimdark and then changed it to be lighter. So maybe that is why it feels Grimdark but it isn't. This would explain why the prologue is much more grimdark than the rest of the book.
Bio, from biographical. Pic, from picture. Bio-pic= biographical picture. Coined in Variety magazine in the 1940s. Bi-opic, in medical terms, would be the capacity to have dual-focal vision.
I agree with Will 100%. His rants were so validating. I read Mistborn a year ago, and found it so aggressively meh that I havent been able to force myself to try another sanderson. I'd rather read a terrible book than a book competent enough to be boring. It felt like a solid concept and outline of a story, that instead of being fleshed out in writing, was rendered in flat cardboard cut outs. I'm so glad I'm not alone on this. People love him so much I thought maybe I just picked up the wrong one. Hearing why Gina liked it let me know I'm just the exact wrong type of audience for him. Without emotional stakes and relevance, I'm too disconnected to care what happens, especially when the concepts also don't feel explored enough to me.
Yes, it was validating for me too! I actually read TFE over the summer bc I'm getting into fantasy and a bunch of other booktubers, who I *thought* had similar taste as me, they were all gushing about how mistborn is one their favorite series 🧐So now I don't listen to them anymore lol
@@kingragnarok7302 It does suck sometimes that I struggle to enjoy books that are not written as well as they could have been. On the other hand, it makes my appreciation of books that are very wellwritten even greater. I will still recommend Mistborn to readers who I know arent as picky as I am.
As a big Sanderson fan (I've read all of his main series and most of his standalones) I do understand where you're coming from with your criticisms and with mistborn specifically I think one of the main reasons it worked so well for me is the fact that I read them as a teenager and did a lot of the emotional work required for that element of emotionality myself. However, I do think Sanderson has improved significantly as writer in over the last two decades. Also concerning your comments about the tone of mistborn vs its grimdark world that is actually something he has called out himself. As for potential recommendations: A recent book that is not too long that also has a very different tone and style is Tress of the Emerald sea, which came out this year. With this Sanderson was going for a more whimsical and fairy tale esque story. Another option would be Skyward which is a YA scifi that is fairly recent has as far as I am concerned some of Sanderson's best character work and just does a really good job with its side characters. Skyward is also in first person, so I'm actually really curious what your thoughts on it are given your track record with first-person narration. Both this recommendations also have more than 4 female characters in speaking roles 😅
Omg what a coinkeedink! I literally just started Mistborn a few days ago, now I face the dilemma of listening to this whole video and getting spoilers or waiting to finish the book...
Despite two thirds of the podcast hosts not being thrilled with it, just judging by the description and the gripes you had with it, it would probably be a series I'd enjoy since I'm not necessarily a character-focused reader. The whole alomancy thing sounds very intriguing and I love hard magic systems that make sense. As far as taking our world and adding some magic to it... well, Kushiel kind of did that and it worked great, so I don't think it would be a problem. It might actually make it easier for a new reader to get into the series without being too confused about the sheer abundance of new races/titles/attributes. Honestly, if I start reading it, I have a feeling it might become my newest obsession. I'd also be curious to read more of his recent stuff, but since I know most of it is tied together I'd feel compelled to start at the beginning so it all makes more sense. But ooof... the sheer output of this author makes it a daunting task. With my limited free time, I might never catch up to current books.
One of my biggest drawbacks of the books I've read from Sanderson it's that he doesn't know how to write women. Vyn feels like a guy most of the times and when she is feminine he checkmarks all the existing cliches and bad stereotypes of women. I literally was highlighting all those stereotypes as I was reading this trilogy. I agree it was too long and I just don't like his characters. I do love his world building and his online lectures about writing. I just don't think he is that good when it comes to his books. I really needed a critical commentary like yours about this books because I feel most people just put Sanderson on a pedestal and I see many flaws in his writing. I remember finishing the trilogy angered at so many things and looking for content that at least talked about what Mistborn trilogy lacked of and I just found one video and that channel no longer exists 🫣 it was really exasperating But anyway, this was a great video ❤
Yes. YES. I have a feeling like it isn't discussed much because he doesn't seem like a maliciously sexist person. I had a strong feeling that he was doing his best with Vin and just failing because of being clueless. The result is the type of character I adore, but do not believe is a real person at all. Same as her husband(don't remember his name). Thousand years of conditioning to believe ska are barely human and he gets over it in like a chapter. Lack of women in this world was so loud to me. Like empty spaces on canvas that noone bothered to paint. He adds more (meaning I remember 2) female characters with any kind of significant role and both of the seem as flat as Vin.
If you want a newer (and much better imo) Sanderson book to try, he released Yumi and the Nightmare Painter earlier this year. It's a standalone novel, with only a few "Easter egg" type tie-ins from other books, and it's much shorter than his mega series entries as well. I would be interested to hear your thoughts as far as his growth as an author!
I agree with others (and I say this as a Sanderson fan) that Mistborn is one of his weakest books. I always recommend readers try Warbreaker first, because it’s a standalone but not his first. Stormlight Archive is amazing, but definitely not a good place for new Sanderson readers to start. That said, his YA series Skyward is actually my fave from him, though the last book isn’t out yet.
I personally liked The Final Empire (I too prefer a less sterile writing style but I can still enjoy the book for what it is), then went into The Well of Ascension and profusely disliked it, so it's going to be a while before I touch another Sanderson :') But, as always, your criticism is greatly appreciated!! I love your analysis and how civil your discussions are, as a fellow critical reader :D
I have a theory, there are three roads to success. Be the first. Be the best. Be accessable. Sort of being unchallenging without giving away the game about being unchallenging. Based on the original Mistborn trilogy Sanderson falls squarely in the latter, imho.
(Spoilers) This series had a scene in particular that made absolutely sure I would read every Brandon piece out there. In book 3 the scene when we get for the first time the POV from Zane, and his inner dialogue with "God". Fuck that hit me so hard. If I get even a slight chance of feeling the way I felt during that chapter again, I will read every goddamn long book he writes. Stormlight Archives was also quite a gut punch for me. Shallan the female POV character in this series is really well done, in my opinion, and was very much relatable in her narration. Love your videos guys ❤
@@nazimelmardi I don't care about worlds. But after that dog scene, and after learning that Sanderson himself thinks it is normal and rational (from author's commentary on his website), I can't trust I won't walk face-first into something equally disgusting.
Sanderson has admitted that he wrote himself into a corner with the ending of mistborn and ended up using something that was meant to be slowly introduced in the next book. The prose and worldbuilding does get better once you get to his stormlight archive series.
I was obsessed with these books as a teenager and as I grew up I began to actively hate them. The biggest thing that caused me to stop connecting with them was watching The Matrix trilogy for the first time. Basically the entire plot from these books is lifted from the matrix and sanitized to remove the queer subtext (which branderson probably didn’t even notice was there). You can also see some very Mormon/evangelical creationism attitudes in the way the magic system has become “polluted” and weakened over time. Even though that’s not how genetic traits work in the real world that’s a way creationists think they work. There’s also the very gross idea that the skaa were originally created genetically inferior, that’s just kinda racist. In the second mistborn series there is also a background character that is a lesbian and one of the main characters is a man who has a crush on her. He constantly sexually harasses her and it is played for laughs. This literally made me sick as a lesbian myself. No thank you Brandon Sanderson for the representation, you just used a horrific situation as a joke.
Hi! I've been watching your videos for awhile and I had a question, I heard advice somewhere that no chapter should be completely dedicated to character development and the plot must always be moving somewhat or readers will get bored. Is this valid advice? I can't tell.
I'm just a rando on the internet but for what it's worth in my opinion no. Stories have multiple layers, like themes, main plot, side plots, all the different character arcs, character reationships, worldbuilding and possibly others I can't think of right now. Try to write scenes and chapters that progress at least two or three of these simultaneously, but one of them doesn't always have to be the plot. imo boring scenes are often ones that only progress one of these, i.e. a long infodump about worldbuilding (versus for example a conversation between two characters that does worldbuilding but also reveals something about both characters' personalities and progresses their relationship in some way).
Have to admit... As much as I probably shouldn't want this, I'd love to have three different perspectives of readers actually analyze and debate my work to such a degree. I'd be wincing and cringing the whole time watching, but it'd be such useful feedback.
I can feel Gina getting more tired the longer this goes on 😂 Honestly she's better than me because when y'all hate a book I love I just don't listen at all 😅 im weak and i admit it So thanks for being a trooper Gina! Will & Maria do not go easy 😅
My experience with Sanderson is that I like his YA stuff way more than his "adult" books. I find his writing style works much better for the YA genre and I just end up enjoying those stories more.
Mistborn actually is his second book. Elantris was his first. If you want a masterpiece, read Stormlight Archive. He has written dozens of books, but Mistborn is very early in his bibliography, so Will is wrong.
His writing his improved a bit over time, but the process hasn't. It's still very mechanical. You can still see all the seams of the construction. And characters are still his weakness. Also, everything is so loooooong. Stormlight is even more bloated. With no book below 1000 pages. That's also where the weak prose really hurts. I can take mid writing in a more concise story. But thousands of pages of blandness is not fun for me. Good technical writing can make passages where nothing much happens interesting all on its own.
stormlight archives feel even more like they were written by a teen or a very young writer, when it comes to the emotional logic/maturity of the main characters. he goes all out on the magic and world building, but his characters did not get better. maybe even worse.
im 54 mins into this video and this is a rare occasion where im struggling to finish it. Not trying to be mean but the blond girl is doing the thing sanderfans always do that eventually put me off all his work. there is this insane defensiveness of sanderson's flaws as a writer. Every flaw they turn into some hidden strength. and 54 mins into this video, it sounds like she would be just as happy if this was a power point presentation with only bullet points. Mistborn is written like a video game. it has the pacing of video game narrative and it requires the same inferences of story-telling devices to keep it coherent. if you told me this was written by a 19 year old and was their first attempt, i'd be incredibly impressed. but this is written by the guy chosen to complete the WoT series yet it feels so hollow and devoid of nuance that i always warn ppl off of mistborn when they want to start a fantasy series.
I think Sanderfans, such as myself, get defensive precisely because people use such demeaning language to describe his books. It legitimately feels like the people who hate Sanderson's writing and the people who love it have not read the same text sometimes, with the way people describe it as if it were on the same level of quality as ACOTAR or something.
@@atreides213 sure that maybe true. but it also does not negate the fact that sanderson fans routinely handwave away significant problems with his books as is being done in this video continuously. so how about you meet me halfway right here and now. I'll admit that sanderson is a great storyteller. he has great epic endings to his books and always has interesting ideas about his worlds. But i think he's very bad at dialogue, clumsy with his intrigue-based plots and relies too heavily on his big endings to make up for bad pacing. can we meet in the middle and at least say all these things are fair praise/critiques without the need to attack another author/fanbase(like acotar)? *extends youtube comment-section olive branch*
@@ddookhar I can agree that some of his books have a tendency to drag, including the first third of this book. And while I think his dialogue isn't terrible, especially in later books like the Stormlight Archives, there are definitely very clunky sections, and most of his attempts at comedy are at least moderately cringeworthy. I'm going to have to hard disagree about his intrigue-based plots, though, I think he does a fantastic job with intrigue most of the time.
@@atreides213 fair enough but also thanks for making my point for me. I gave praise for things i think sanderfans would want detractors to acknowledge at the least & some very soft critiques that i thought sanderfans would be willing to concede are problematic. but instead you did the thing i initially complained sanderfans of doing; being overly defensive and unwilling to bear any criticism of Lord Brandon. Im glad you find significant enjoyment in Lord B's books. Im sad you seem to have a low opinion of acotar(who's fandom is only marginally less annoying than sanderson's). And i do wish Lord Brando keeps gifting you more books than any single fandom can ever know what to do with. But maybe, just maybe, have some sympathy for those that want Better instead of More even if you dont agree.
@@ddookhar I literally acknowledged the points you made that I thought were valid, and respectfully pushed back on the point I disagreed with. I thought you were trying to be respectful earlier, but thanks for confirming to me that you were instead being a condescending snob. I may have trashed ACOTAR in passing (a series I actually read and enjoy despite its--in my opinion--poor writing) but I wouldn't have the gall to talk to fan of the series the way you talked to me. Your final paragraph in this reply was so arrogant, patronizing, and smug that it's clear to me you're just a person who likes to feel superior to others and treat your own taste as objective fact. I was like that once, but I grew out of it when I was like twenty. Hope you do the same.
I read mistborn after reading most of his stormlight series (great books on a character level, terrible politics on oppression lol) and i didnt love it but kel’s martyrdom and painting of himself as a jesus like figure to prompt rebellion seriously irritated me at the end, esp as an actual, real life minority so im glad you guys talked about that
Agreed on the ... somewhat tactless handling of politics of oppression 🙃but I think, and correct me if I'm wrong it's been a while since I read these books, the point of Kal's arc IS that his tendency towards martyrdom is a major flaw that he needs to work on? That his deeply ingrained Hero Complex is a harmful trauma response that warps his view of the world and himself? That seemed to me what his development was getting at. Especially by the time we get to "Rhythm of War" I think ...?
@@NaritaZaraki well, I mean, if Sanderson doesn't understand the nuances of Marxist intersectionality, the oppression narrative, and benefits of social justice through the lens of Marxism... Maybe he should not comment on it. Right? Or... maybe he knows what a bunch of bullshit it is, and inserts his understanding into his stories... And by the way...what the actual f*ck are "the politics of oppression?" Is that another worthless deconstruction you learned from your Frosh Poli-sci prof? lmfao. Tactless...you can not make this sh*t up.
oh boy, I'm surprised these comments are not flooded with rabid sandofans. I have heard not great things about how they react to any kind of criticism of his work. But this was a great discussion! In terms of the magic system, it seems very similar to, if not based on, DnD where instead of verbal, somatic, and material components, you just need material components (metals) to cast your "spells". That emotion controlling thing is similar to Calm Emotions. And being able to see 5 seconds into the future is literally the 9th level spell Foresight. This is not necessarily a bad thing, I just agree with Will that this not something new or cool.
I really enjoyed it this one. I got invested in the story, I was really curious about the world, and I liked the magic system. I gave it 4 stars. What I didn't like was the pacing and some of the characters. The pacing was weird. The first 30% of the book it was so slow, and I was still so confused about the world. Other times things happen way too quickly: Vin is instantly good at pretending to be a noble, her feelings for Elend came out of nowhere, etc. Then all the hell breaks loose in the last 5% of the book. Also so much was happening off-page. About the characters: I liked Vin and I instantly connected to her but I can't say the same for the rest of them. Kelsier supposedly is this very charismatic leader, but he didn't come across as such, at least for me. I didn't like him that much honestly, I preferred Marsh. And then the rest of the characters: Dox, Breeze, Ham, Clubs, Spook, etc feel like NPCs, I feel like I know them so little, thus I don't really care about them.
Sanderson writes, in my mind, a mechanics guy not a systems guy like relationships feel baffling it seems to me that Will wants more thematic correspondence. like if say, the magic system was set in medieval europe and the metals followed the alchemical relationships to the planets to spheres of life?
i disagree. Will and Maria are often way too prescriptive with their opinions. I feel Gina is pushing back against that prescriptive attitude. It doesn't become too glaring when everyone on the podcast are aligned with their judgments about a book. but it sure shows when they have someone on who disagrees with them. that's really what this podcase always have been, actually, personal judgments and opinions despite Will insisting he is 'objective always', when really, no one can be. p/s for context, i have never read a single Sanderson book.
@@phangkuanhoong7967 I'm honestly really glad someone pointed this out. I'm often one to defend the act of nitpicking, especially the prescriptive kind, because I really do believe that if one can honestly find THAT many legitimate nitpicks within a story, then those small, seemingly inconsequential things actually do become a real problem. Yet, I rarely find that most people who do nitpick, actually fall into the camp of those who have discovered dozens and dozens of legitimate miniature gripes with the story they're critiquing. I do appreciate this podcast and how it acts as a harsher side of the sliding scale of literature critique, but I also wish they would actually try and critique the story itself as much as they nitpick everything that surrounds it, which I rarely see them do. I get that if the foundation is weak, the story suffers, I really do. Yet, I think there's value in allowing a story to be flawed and recognize its triumphs if it manages to balance on that weaker foundation without toppling over. I don't think Will, Maria, and Katie see stories that way, but I wish they would at least try to be a little bit more focused on the meat of the story, rather than going nitpick scavenging all while pretending to be objective in their notice of issues.
I think it's rough for anyone to talk about something you love with two people who dislike it and who can talk circles around you. You easily end up in an attack/ defense situation
I think senses arent too overpowered, like emotional manipulation could be. Like emotional manipulation could have one that makes you really happy and euphoric or others, and another to make feel misterable till depressed. Emotional manipulation shoud have different subsets how it affects. One could be a really high aphrotisiacum hormonal power. Agree if you have emotional manipulation, you probably need to devide it to be more specific in effects. Like the high one that also can be drugs, the love potions that can just have more control, or euphotisiacim. And one to make you really bad till depressed and can only make people suffer. The enhancement of senses makes a lot of sense if you combine, like magnetism and seeing far can be broken.
I can read 250k fanfiction stories in a single day, but I'm one of those people who couldn't get past the prologue of Mistborn because of the multiple POVs in it. (It was either 3 or 5, can't remember) I need to connect to a character to get into a book and with so many switches in a short amount of time, it was a sign of poor writing to me. EDIT: just to clarity since I think it'll be taken the wrong way. I'm not saying the author is a poor writer. Multiple POVs switching in a short amount of time has always been a sign of poor writing to me. In this case, it happens in a prologue where they felt unimportant in the long run. Why should I care? A writer needs to make me care about the characters and this book fails to hook me enough.
I just started listening to the audiobook and I'm completely lost as far as POV goes. I didn't even realize the prologue had more than 2 POVs... I LOVE multi-POV stories but I don't understand why any author would jump around SO MUCH with NO WARNING. Each POV should have its own chapter IMO.
Vin's growing comfortability with balls is a key point in her relationship with Elend Venture. There, I said it.
So I'm not done with the video so maybe someone brings this up, but I just got to the point where Maria exclaims "He wrote TWELVE books before this?" and I have to clarify. As I understand it, Sanderson wrote 12 books that he couldn't sell to save his life, was about to give up, wrote Mistborn, got an industry friend to get him an in, got a contract, Mistborn wasn't ready by the first deadline so he sent them Elantris instead, published that, and then he published the first Mistborn book as his second published book. Many, many authors write several books before they publish anything, so while 12 is a lot, it's not entirely unheard of. I wrote 5 books before I was comfortable publishing one, and the other 5 are hidden in a deep dark hole, never to see the light of day again.
Still not published... But I've always said I've destroyed more worlds than I've finished.
Had a whole world and a language set up, remembered Tolkien was a thing, burned it.
3 or 4 long term projects later, and here I am with Nanowrimo again.
It’s a thing. A lot of people have books never published. Those are just not existing. His first book is Elantris.
Points of clarification: The first book he sold, Elantris, was actually the fifth book he had written. He wrote 13 novels before selling it (the last one being Way of Kings Prime, which he had given up on publishing when he wrote the first draft). IIRC, Brandon's "industry friend" was Dan Wells, an also unpublished author at the time who randomly plugged Brandon to an editor (Moshe Feder) who happened to already have the Elantris query sitting in his slush pile. (Side Note: Brandon also later plugged one of Dan's books to Moshe, who then bought it as well.) Brandon then got a Mistborn contract. As opposed to missing his Mistborn deadline, Brandon actually finished writing the manuscripts for the whole trilogy prior to publishing book 1. This allowed him to rewrite book 1 based on events in books 2 and 3. After that, he then got a Wheel of Time contract due to Harriet, who read his homage to Robert Jordan and then subsequently read Mistborn. (Note: Her list of prospects for the Wheel of Time job included only Brandon and George R.R. Martin, but Harriet disqualified Martin due to his unfinished ASOIF series, so Brandon won by default. He didn't mind.) Wheel of Time made him popular and he hasn't stopped writing to this day. The rest is history; sorry for my nerdiness.
This actually really comforts me about my books lying in my folders I don't want to see the light of day, thank you.
1:05:20 this whole diatribe is just ridiculous.
First, they were only going to send a portion of the army to draw out the garrison so they could invade the city. Not the whole thing.
Second, if Kell attacked the Pits by himself, the Lord Ruler wouldn’t send forth the Garrison, he’d send like two inquisitors.
i've watched some of Sanderson lectures and in one he says that he's not a very emotional guy. He literally said that he doesn't have lows and highs he just feels ok all the time.
god I wish that was me
Lucky guy
Omg
Is he ok?
@@theangrypotato1525He’s a multimillionaire who doesn’t feel sadness. That sounds amazing!
It's really fascinating to me how the less emotional, more mechanical stuff can actually work so much better for some people. Maybe that facilitates more self-insertion. It's good to know that the conventional wisdom of relying on immersion and mirror neuron stuff isn't the only effective way
Maybe good to have some of both to allow for enjoyment across readers. Delicately tho, so as not to lose both types.
I wouldn’t say it helps with self-insertion, I would actually say the opposite. However, as someone who is autistic, it certainly makes understanding the characters and what their going through easier to understand and relate to than simply relying on “the feels” of the narration.
I can’t believe not a single joke about getting used to ‘balls’ has been made so far - by Will especially 😂
I don't like how she frames an apparent preference for less complex story telling as neurodivergence.
Honestly... I'm 'neurospicy' too (autism and ADHD) and I found Mistborn to be... just fine lmao. It was enjoyable enough overall (book two was a slog though), principally because I went in with very low expectations, but it's nothing amazing. Outside of the magic system, the world-building isn't that good at all, the prose... well, Branderson isn't known for beautiful prose and I believe he admits to this freely. Character work was whatever and theming was very shallow. 🤷♀
This is just a personal take on mistborn (aka the book that got me into cosmere in the first place).
It is very formulaic book. It stands to testament that this book feels like the equivalent to the action adventure genre of the 1990s where Sanderson places particular aspects of the plot in a formulaic manner. "Here is our protagonist". "Here is our bad guy." "This is our magic system." "This is our band of crew members." "This is the world we are reading in." "This is the goal this book wants to accomplish."
Everything is meticulously calculating that I find it understandable how others do not enjoy this book the way I do. But ironically the mistborn series is the one novel series I can read it like its a movie transcribed rather than a novel because of the barebones formula sanderson went for to write this.
I've yet to finish listening to the podcast, but as far as I've seen from your takes, its a fair criticism in the points you've mentioned.
For worldbuilding, I would love to hear their thoughts on The Stormlight Archive
I'm autistic and I have the opposite feeling towards BrandoSando's work than Gina (not to say she's wrong, it's just putting the "divergence" in neurodivergence). I haven't read Mistborn, but I did get through half of Way of Kings and two-thirds of his Wheel of Time contributions, and I couldn't connect to any of the characters because they were so shallow. Even characters that I was familiar with through WoT, it was like the bulk of their personality had been removed and replaced with cliff notes versions. (And don't get me started on the glorified self-insert he added who ended up with more POV time in three books than a massive chunk of the female POV characters *in the combined series*). And without that connection to the characters, the plot felt very flat and distant. I didn't really care about what was happening to the world because none of it felt real. I like intricate worldbuilding and magic systems, but I need the emotional connection to enjoy a story (it's basically how I learned to emote as an undiagnosed kid afterall 😅)
I'm at 14 minutes and I want to read this book before going on. The best part about this podcast so far is that you all have different opinions on what makes the book good or not but that you agree on a fundamental level. You guys are great. Argue like siblings and stay friends!
You mentioned at one point that it felt odd this was a culture that had existed for 1000 years but you couldn't really feel it, and it was just like medieval Europe, still. This is one of my problems with the Song of Ice and Fire world (no need to take a shot because this is a criticism). The Wall was built *8000* years ago. What did *our* world look like 8000 years ago? Even if you want to say there was in-fighting, wars, repression, etc.--a culture with at least 8000 years of history should have some technological advancements beyond horses and ravens. A common person, doing laundry every single day, will eventually get sick of doing it by hand and someone will build a washing machine.
In this book, it is later revealed/explained that the Lord Ruler was, for some reason, intentionally holding the populace back, beyond even his manipulation of the orbit and climate. Within a century after the end of what seems like the bronze age after the third book, people are making guns and blimps, and while I don't know what Sanderson's planned timeline scale is, he's going to write 6 more books on the same planet with more and more advanced tech.
This is an old comment but I feel the need to note that GRRM himself has said many times that this is an issue he is very conscious of. There are other inconsistencies beyond that as well like how the houses survived for thousands of years without rebellion, or how the Targ’s family tree is so small(even with the inbreeding). The difference though, is that the way the world of ASOIAF is built and written within the books makes these inconsistencies feel less jarring and more fluid in the story.
Gina's point is so interesting because I'm AUDHD and I read over 100 pages of this and got so bored bc I do need to connect emotionally with my characters and this was worldbuilding/pot driven and character felt like an afterthought to me, but I do feel things intensely and pick up on emotional shallowness very quickly, which I felt with these characters and the author's voice. It felt very sanitized and again, boring to me.
I feel the exact same way. I read it a couple years back so I can't really remember the details, but I remember the main characters mentor dying and me not feeling a damn thing about it. I'd definitely describe it as sanitized.
Me too but I couldn’t even get further than two or three chapters into the book.
I wanted to read Brando Sando but he just couldn’t catch my attention and keep me hooked. I didn’t even catch that it was an apartheid society 😅
And I’m the kind of reader who once I’m hooked I won’t stop until I’m finished, even if I have to stay awake until 5am to do it, so I was hoping I’d like his stuff but so far I don’t
Ooooh another AuDHD POV! I felt the same way when I tried to read Warbreaker. The worldbuilding/plot wasn't interesting enough to keep me engaged and the characters felt very standoffish. There was a level of detachment where I was struggling to keep reading because I didn't care about anyone. And I thought the magic system was stupid AF. I didn't even make it to 100 pages, though, so respect to you!
Precisely my thoughts. I think it’s part of the reason I really struggle with high fantasy books in general since most of them are world building heavy. Authors go to great lengths to flesh out centuries of elaborate histories for their stories, much of it not really relevant to the current story (or at least not relevant enough for me), which a lot of people actually really enjoy! For me, it’s just like reading a textbook.
I remember desperately trying to get through LOTR because it’s a favorite in my family. I finally gave up around the chapter with the talking trees. After the fifth time rewinding the audio book i realized it probably just wasn’t for me and that’s okay. It doesn’t make it any less of a fantastic series for people who enjoy it, but there’s books better suited for me.
I think everyone has different suspensions of disbelief that get them to fall out of reading a book.
I grew up on fantasy/anime series so many elements aren't jarring to me. Whenever Romace is thrown in that not very obvious, and fowardly cliché, I do find it jarring, because my experience with those elements are very surface level.
Some people like Rembrandt, some people like Monet, some people like Picasso, and some people like Rothko. I can understand two of those four groups of people. Same thing goes for writing styles. I read Sanderson books mostly for the intricately-crafted magic systems. His works feel like fantasy stories told through a hard science fiction lens.
It's also worth noting that Sanderson's works have a lot in common with Jordan's: the individual books in a series add up to more than the sum of their parts. E.g., there are things that happen in Mistborn that take on new meaning once you've finished Hero of Ages. And, here's the important thing: THAT is a huge part of the appeal for many (most?) Sanderson fans. It's like comparing episodic TV from the 70s and 80s to modern shows with their inticate webs of multi-season story arcs.
Agreed with Will. On paper, it's FINE. Sanderson is competent at story-crafting. His world-building is shallow but present. He does get better at it over time, but I think his biggest weakness is that his characters lack personality and nuance. Sanderson very much plots out the narratives well in advance, so the characters generally must adhere to the story he's telling rather than their own gravitas. Actions and motivations feel somewhat staged because of it, and too much happens off-screen. Again, he does address some of this over time, more thought is put into the emotional weight of scenes, etc., but I don't think he'll ever be more than mediocre. His philosophies on writing won't allow for it because he writes to be successful. That comes first. He has cool ideas and concepts, but the execution isn't exceptional because he MUST adhere to his formula. Getting into the nuanced implications of the concepts he's exploring isn't what he's interested in. He just wants to tell cool stories and highlight the nerdy stuff he finds fascinating. Which is FINE. He has found an audience for that and good on him for making his dream come true.
At least Sanderson is capable of making a cohesive narrative. I can turn my brain off and read Sanderson knowing what I'm going to get. It's not terrible. It's straightforward. Everything makes sense (mostly). He tends to keep a decent pace and knows how to ramp up the stakes. It's not entirely predictable/twists feel earned. The same cannot be said for a lot of new authors in the fantasy space. I feel that's part of the reason why Sanderson is popular. There's a lot worse out there, and he produces content regularly that's not difficult to read, his narratives don't despense with much nonsense, and he doesn't emphasize romance or write like a fanfic author. I can appreciate that for what it is. I know there's a lot of folks that are die-hard Sanderson fans, but I'd wager there's just as many who view his books as I do. Not my faves but they're readable.
Sanderson read one of his books on his channel. I listened for about 15 minutes and knew that his writing style is not for me. It just lacked something. Many love his books, but it's just not for me.
I'd actually be really interested in your thoughts on his later works and then compare them to Mistborn such as Stormlight Archives and his stand alone books like Yumi and the nightmare painter, etc.
14:00 Kelsier changes a fuckload throughout the book. His goals and means never change, but his attitudes and motivations definitely do.
I feel like I’m the only one in the world who just can’t jive with BrandoSando’s writing style but you guys nailed my feelings about his work right on the head lol. I feel very seen.
It's a very common criticism on the fantasy Reddit
It’s a common thing right to his face. He does it purposely. And now he is the most popular fantasy writer. I recommend to you Steven Erikson with Malazan Book of the Fallen. That’s how you do it. But also that’s how we read it. 😂
Well, I just became a fan of this podcast as of 38:16. The way the guy (William?) goes into detail about Sanderson’s limited viewpoint affecting his writing on women. I think it also applies to other topics that come up in his books like sex, racism, or classism and William echoed how I felt reading this and Warbreaker. I feel that Sanderson doesn’t really get these topics on deeper levels and so his writing on them is so boring and surface level.
I actually really like this book and it works for me! -but the criticism here is valid and I appreciate the conversation being had. Of all Sanderson’s works I’ve read, the ones that find myself wanting reread (and therefore I suppose are my favorites) are the first 2 Stormlight books and Warbreaker (this one is a little older so I’m interested to go back to it and see if it has some of the same things you talked about here.)
Really interesting, so glad I found your channel! Although I fall closer to Will and Maria on most of the takes, I'm on Gina's side with the magic system. I think what makes it interesting is that it IS so simple and boring on the face of what the powers can do, but then uses that small set of minor powers as tools to build a more complex result. Most of the metals are useful on their own in a very limited way: pushing and pulling, heightened senses, getting stronger, hiding your powerful friends, persuading people. Modest, practical advantages. The cool part is combining them into something flashier that depends on each component as a distinct part of the system. "Flight" may be one of the most basic magic/super powers in media, but for a reader who likes to see how the mechanics work and play off of each other, using "push stuff+strength+senses" to get to *flying through the air by bouncing off coins you throw at the ground while invisible to everyone else because you have darkvision and landing from hundreds of feet in the air without shattering your bones* is pretty cool. I like a D&D spell as much as the next guy, but there's also something compelling about a building-block style of magic you can follow along with like a recipe.
Sanderson once mentioned that one of his early unpublished novels was an attempt to write grimdark because publishers were looking for more GRRM. The magic system of that book was repurposed for mistborn. I suspect that's why it feels like it is a grimdark setting by the wrong author.
Which is why he went - silly flying cowboy with flying enemy zeppelins for the sequel series setting
You guys should read assassin's apprentice. Hobb's writing is like the opposite of Sanderson imo
Yeah, as a fantasy author, she is on the other end of the spectrum as far as her depiction of emotions and the readers' closeness to her characters go. I definitely think she would be an interesting author for them to read next.
@@kimlarbiere2353yes I could be wrong but I think maria would enjoy it
Hell no, her books are too long/slow. Just because she is on the opposite end of the spectrum regarding plot vs character focus doesn't mean she does it in an engaging way. I read Fool's Assassin and felt trapped inside Fitz's head, he was so goddamn passive and the detail to the characters' thoughts and emotions felt so drawn-out, so melodramatic, so performative and unconvincing... Similar to the way SJM (over)writes emotions, even though their stories are very different. And a common criticism with Hobb's writing is her slow pacing which definitely was the case in that book.
@@EleiyaUmei lol I would never compare hobb to sjm. To each their own
I adore hobb. Fritz’s passivity is a product of his trauma/abandonment issues and training. It is the fatal flaw of his tragedy
I'm only three and a half minutes in but I wanted to comment on Brandon's writing habits:
Brandon is a very competent lecturer on writing novels. He has three different iterations of his class on writing somewhere on RUclips and he openly says that with all the books before the ones that got published he was not a revision girlie (not a direct quote). Apparently he'd go through a first draft he'd just written and go "oh there's all these mistakes; I'll just fix them in the next book I write."
So yes, twelfth book in that he probably kinda understands how to make the words come out and he probably has a good system in place for doing things and it probably means that he's got good ground work going in as far as assessing story structure and designing magic systems and worlds and whatnot, but I think Mistborn might've been the second book he'd actually sat down and thoroughly revised the way we think of books as almost universally needing revision in order to turn a first draft into a passable product.
That said, I never read Mistborn because he never dropped any interesting lore about character design that I wanted to see in a book. The Way of Kings has a character that he actually had to split into two to make the story work and that was a very academically compelling concept to me. It also, for the record, has a much more tolerable female to male ratio.
I also fall into the category that I felt as a fantasy reader, I should try Sanderson, but only got about 100 pages into Mistborn before DNFing it. The characters felt incredibly distant and I did not care for any of them. I distinctly remember the first(?) meeting of Vyn and one of the royals, where she notices that he has a book among others about weather patterns with a very long title. And it's later revealed that that is actually a cover for for "rebellious writing" and that whole ordeal of getting to the point of it and the explanation was so outdrawn and clunky, that it became my breaking point.
I agree with the sentiment that the "neurospicy" comment was generalizing in a very frustrating way, as neurodivergent person. I found the patterns that built the story of this book annoyingly visible. I can still see people enjoying this type of story, like evyerbody has different preferences, but i feel like the thought of making the enjoyment of it a case of "neurodivergent readers vs. neurotypical readers" is misplaced.
I agree and i fucking hate the term neurospicy
Yeah I wrote a comment about how too many people are using “Neurospicy” “Neurodivergent” like it’s a horoscope. Your ADHD/Autism is not mine and a diagnosis doesn’t create a personality or personal preference for writing styles. Certain aspects can connect better but it is becoming so generalized that it’s actually excluding the community.
Same. Quit after about 100 pages. I just felt nothing throughout. To be fair, I am not a fantasy reader, I picked up Mistborn out of curiosity after I kept hearing about Sanderson, but I usually can get some entertainment out of any genre if done in an engaging way. This one just did nothing for me whatsoever.
ffs - are you "triggered?" This whole "neuro-divergent" now applies to anybody with any phobia of any sort, and bad habits from not making the bed to not washing their ass in the shower.
Calling his writing fomulaic at best is one thing. But getting triggered over this term is ridiculous. By today's standard, self-diagnosis, mainly through some form of oppression-lens and victim-stacking, everybody is "neuro-spicy."
But be frustrated, and add a smiley face on the board next to your name for not only spotlighting yet _another_ problem with speech, but for including yourself in the stack...
lmao
I think the grand cosmere series is really good. Even though the people say to start with mistborn, I didn't, my friends didn't and I wouldn't recommend it first. Way of Kings was better for me because I like slow paced books. Elantris and warbreaker has some great starting points too. I even know someone who got into it but reading white sand 👀. Mistborn isn't the best starting point.
I read this book not long ago at the request of my sister, who loved it. Before that I had tried going through it several times but always stopped at the moment Vin and the crew is introduced. Not because of Vin herself but because after Vin, I thought: "Oh these are all the major characters and I feel nothing for anyone of them." This time, I forced myself to finish.
I agree with what Maria and Will are saying. There is a certain 'dullness' to the book. That lack of 'atmosphere' that you guys talked about. I remember reading the prologue with the horrible treatment of slaves and a world long in decline and thinking, "I should care more about this. Why don't I?!" That's because nothing about the prose or the scene or the dialogue made me feel like I was doing anything more than reading words on paper. The colors did not invoke emotion, the verb choice did not make me feel the violence, the descriptions did not move me. It felt much like an elaborate review that tried its hardest to be unbiased in its recollection of the story. But book characters are meant to be biased! If you walk through their perspective and remain indifferent in prose, then I will remain indifferent to the character!
I thought about this more deeply after watching your review and hearing Gina's comments. So I suggested this book to a friend with alexithymia. He isn't a person who enjoys reading, but this one he really loved. And from the way he explained it then, it is exactly what I was dissatisfied with that he enjoyed. For him, most every other book was verbose to the point of tears. Describing emotions, for him who had a hard time connecting or understanding them, was an immediate shock that brought him out of the story. Having subtext through colors, sounds or atmosphere may have as well been a writer's way of trying to draw a movie and failing by overfocusing on the details. He explained it better, I think, but that's what I got.
I think, Sanderson's writing really speaks to those who prefer a direct approach and who really hated explaining metaphors in high school. "Less is more," for them, not because of the number of words but because the words themselves cannot be misinterpreted, misunderstood, or read in ways other than the word itself. Where I feel disengaged because of the lack of depth and colors, they feel engaged because they can transfer their own emotions and their own colors more easily when facing a world of whites and grays. They, the readers, make the world 3D, not the book itself.
Anyway, that is how I think about it.
I wouldn't call the book bad or the characters bad in any way. It is very much a good book. Like... to the dot. I can't think of a single book written in such an evidence-based way that can prove itself good. Very formulaic, as you guys said. But formulas work for a reason. It simply offers a very mediocre reading experience for readers who have long been used to 'colors'. For others, I am happy they found a writer and a book who can touch them so much.
Sorry for the overly long comment. I just had a lot of thoughts about it when I read it, and barely anyone online 'confessed' to an experience like mine with this book, so I was outrageously happy to find you guys. Thanks a lot!
I read this trilogy like a month ago and felt the same way as Will and Maria. Agree with pretty much everything they said. But since it's so universally praised, it made me feel crazy. Unfortunately, I think it only goes downhill after the first book. I loved this discussion and I'm glad I found this podcast!
Huh I like the last book the most
I liked this book, though one of my lasting impressions of it is how its subtle sexism resembles the kind of sexism I deal with in my life. Yet, despite my looking for reviews discussing this particular facet of the book(s in the trilogy), I can't seem to find any. Perhaps I have not looked hard enough, or perhaps this is because people expect there to be invisible sexism in this Christian-coded fantasy, and as such, they are likely to view the book as progressive because of Vin being a main character and because of who the author is. I don't know, this is my speculation. I do know that I have a review typed and ready where I discuss subtle/benign sexism, and how people are willing to pass it off as unimportant because there are more obvious and more egregious examples to crack down on. The reason why this book is so interesting is because its portrayal of female identity is extremely normative. On a surface level, Vin breaks the mold, yet her entire personal arc is about her relationship with her femininity and whether or not she has earned the right to be a "real" woman (and as such, earn her place next to her man). I have not posted this review anywhere out of fear. Knowing what the fandom is like, despite BrandoSando seemingly being a nice guy who advocates tolerance and understanding, I doubt I ever will. This was a good episode, I'm excited to see our RUGGEDLY HANDSOME hosts read and discuss some of the heavy hitters of the genre so cheers for picking it.
Imagine not being able to enjoy a piece of art without needing to dig for ideological giveaways and moralistic "flaws".
Sounds exhausting and joyless.
Maybe. I think the sexism in thjs book if anything comes from the overall problem if flat characterization AND the mean girl bully plot. Vin almost comes across as a bit of a pick me girl when posed against the caricature mean girl of the book (who, of course, also is her rival in love and a mistborn like herself.)
Loved the video, been a long time follower, and I did enjoy having Gina here, but I have to say CAN WE STOP USING NEURODIVERGENT LIKE IT’S A HOROSCOPE.
Too often it’s like“neurospicy” could be swapped out with Scorpio via saying, “As a Scorpio this just connected better for me than it would for a Libra”. STOP IT.
With love to my community we need to articulate why something hits different for *their* neurodivergence rather than generalizing a statement like I keep seeing. I did really like when Maria said you could get 3 people with ADHD and they will all experience the same thing differently.
Totally agree with you on this one. I have autism, but as a reader I agree way more with Will and Maria on this one. Sanderson is quite bland to me, because to me he lacks depth and undertones, both in the prose, in the characters, and in the worldbuilding. Opinions on this has nothing to do with being neurodivergent, but rather what type of reader you are.
Just like everyone born in December are not the same, neurodivergent doesn't mean being part of a hivemind where everyone's the same.
@@jo_helaciTrue, I'm also autistic and lots of autistic people have special interests that are very different from each other. I only had met one autistic person similar to me, the others were so different that I couldn't connect with them.
Exactly. Thank you
As an AuDHDer, yes please. This is an individual thing, it’s not about your neurodivergence, people.
I've barely started this video yet but I'm so glad you're doing this! I tried. I did my best okay. I got Mistborn on Audible and I just couldn't get through it. Same, recently, with Red Rising and Age of Myth...I lost focus on all of them.
I have tried so hard. When you are a fantasy reader everyone wants you to read Sanderson. And I just cannot. I am 4 books in and I still hate worldbuilding(yeah I know, I know). The only thing I actually enjoyed is the magic mechanics even tho I am usually not a hard magic kinda person
I am the same way. I have tried to read mistborn on paper, on e-book, via audiobook. I genuinely believe that Sanderson is a good writer, but I just don't care, man. Shut up and tell me a story!
Same. I tried and I just couldn’t get into Mistborn. I did like Age of Myth though
Oh boy if you try to get into the Stormlight archives it's....A lot.
If you feel compelled to still give his writing a chance I would say go for his standalones. Don't put yourself through behemoth series that are not working for you!! 🥺For all that I enjoy Brandon Sanderson, no writer is worth that kind of drudgery!! 😂 Warbreaker, Tress of the Emerald Sea, and Yumi and the Nightmare Painter are three of his most beloved standalones.
Its funny they pitched the idea of a writing system only people with magic can read because that actually exists in another one of his works, Warbreaker. People with greater magical power are able to see a much wider and detailed spectrum of colours so a new writing system based on colours was made. The exact shade of each colour is so small that a normal person has no way of reading or writing it
Perfect timing. I'm writing atm and I love listening to you'lls podcast in the background.
How do you manage do that? I've tried writing with people talking, and I find it really hard. I can do that while drawing or playing videogames, but I feel like I need to audiate the words of my writing. Though I'd love to be able to write while listening to people talk, because in theory, I wouldn't have to get bored and wander, because something entertaining is going on in the background. Any tips on how you do it?
@@metalman4393 Something to keep in mind is that I have been multitasking like this since I was a child and I have unmedicated ADHD. Another important thing to note is that I do still have to pause the video at times because it does become too distracting sometimes. That being said my advice: I try to stick to videos/movies/tv shows that I've seen so much that I can jump back in at any time and still know exactly what's going on. This makes it easier to tune out enough to focus on my task at hand while still having it be background fodder. I also do this with creators/podcasts that I know I like as well. I like the way that Maria and Will deliver information and their opinions again lending that sense of comfort and ease where I don't feel like I HAVE to stay tuned in at all seconds of the video. Because for the most part I can again tune in and out and still (mostly) keep track of what's happening. Some days this is easier than others. Some days I can't have anything playing while I write because I can't focus. I really just access on a day-to-day basis what my ADHD will and won't allow for. This is all just personal conjuncture so take what I've said with a grain of salt. But I hope this helped.
Yah I'm listening to this while writing a paper, it's perfect!
@@A_Bookish_Obsession It actually does help, thanks. I think I can relate a bit.
@@A_Bookish_Obsession I tried it, and it was alright. Though 300 words in 2 hours is nothing to write home about, I think it's still better than procrastinating.
About the tonal issues; All of the things you mentioned are perfectly valid as preferences, but do seem intentional, or at least he was aware of them. Kelsier's main character trait that is brought up over and over, even after he is removed from the main story, is that he is always trying to smile and brighten the world of the skaa. He despises that 90% of the population, and "his people" (despite the weirdness there) are completely despondent and hopeless. It would, I think, be pretty unsettling if his crew was just as downtrodden and unproductively angry at the world as everyone else. The text takes place in two extreme outlier perspectives, of a noblewoman and a revolutionary, so the fact that there is more jovial and hopeful scenes works for me. Also, I believe sanderson has said at some point that some of his writing at the time was filtered through a distaste for the trendy grimdark stuff, so he probably pushed himself even further to avoid that. Finally, I really don't feel that the tone is overly dissonant or jarring, because even when people are at their happiest, they still live in a world of ash and slavery. Many of the characters are deeply, obviously mentally ill, and there isnt as much of an outlet from it as with his longer, more famous series.
I am fascinated to hear your thoughts. If you like it will finally understand what people like in these books, if you don't I will finally feel not alone.
My biggest gripe is that 3 books in I still felt like barely know any one the characters apart from maybe the main character. They are great sketches of characters, but they somehow never became full people for me.
I think "neurospicy" comment was very generalizing, sincerely neurodiverdent person
@evgeniyaseminenko8594 co-signing this as an autistic person, if anything sandersons writing style pisses me off tbh😭
I think the issue is that "Final Empire" itself is a more simplistic story and IS one of his first hits in his Cosmere world. Mistborn is decent, but strictly to be read as a heist story and for the fun magic system. Mistborn era 1 itself doesn't stand as much on its own, as it serves as a major pillar holding up the rest of the cosmere at this point. The events themselves are very important to the overall series but GETTING there can be a drag.
I DNF this...describing the way the magic worked for me was jarring, the action scenes were like he was describing playing a video game and I found the prose sterile and the character interactions boring...still can't understand the hype around it.
I'm only about half an hour into the discussion but it brings up why I didn't quite connect with the main character in Sanderson's Skyward (spoilers ahead) because the general lack of describing or lingering in the internal emotional landscape of the character and what they're going through. While I did enjoy the story very much, I'm someone that also really enjoys feeling the angst of a character, and one moment in the Skyward book towards the end felt like a missed opportunity to really dive into the main character's head - that is, the point when the aliens can make people see friends as enemies or see things that aren't there/hallucinate a scenario that causes them to attack allies irl. In fiction that is a moment that has a lot of potential to make a reader feel the character's horror from their POV, but the scene went by in a sentence or two.
I used to listen to his writing podcast and he comapired his writing style to windows. Some people have an ornate or flowery writing style that he compared to stain glass windows - the windows are beautiful in themself but they can ofuscate the view (which in this analogy is the story). His says that his writing style is like a plain glass window, which is deliberately bare bones to not distract from the view (his story). I think this goes to show who here at UTT like stained glass and who like an unobstructed view.
And... I say this having never read his books.
I felt like I was reading an outline with this first book. It was so straight forward I was calling plot beats before they happened and absolutely nothing caught me off guard except for the end - because it made no sense whatsoever. Most of the plot felt disjointed like 'this thing needs to happen at this point, but idk how to get there organically, so it just happens because the plot needs it to happen' - this was HUGE when it came to Vin meeting Elend and just....giving him tons of info that was top secret after she just met him??? For what reason??? Plot needed to progress and Elend needed to know that info in order for future scenes to make sense.
I feel like Sanderson gets a really cool idea for the end point of a story and then tries to reverse engineer a world to fit that idea, but it just does not work at all (at least for me). The entire series feels like it's retconning in real time to make anything make any sort of sense, then he tells you to feel a certain way about something but everything around it is like....ummmm no. Just because you're telling me I should feel like 'x' thing was justified or that 'y' thing was necessary or that 'z' thing actually fits with the rules of the world doesn't make it so. Same with the 'grim-dark' ness of the setting - he wants the trappings of grim dark without the actual depth GOOD grim-dark explores which comes off as shallow and perfunctory to the point of being disgustingly harmful when you think about real-life oppression (later finding out that he was Mormon makes all this make so much more sense)
As a 'neuro-spicy' person who likes it when authors spell out the thought process and emotions of the characters rather than just expecting us to know all the intricacies of that through unspoken means, I get what Gina is saying about Sanderson's writing style, but that doesn't mean what he's depicting with that style is good. Every single character is so bland and 'perfect' with no flaws, no faults (other than the annoying 'I care TOO MUCH!! I'm TOO SELF SACRIFICING' bullshit) and everything just works out perfectly - the 'failures' aren't really failures at all because there's never a cost (other than the ones they already knew were coming and agreed to). Vin is just a perfect little Mary Sue (said knowing full well the firestorm that comment brings) but instead of doing something interesting with that, Sanderson just...doesn't. He set up the world to be morally gray and verging on grim dark yet no one is actually gray at all - even those characters we think in this book might have hints of it later on are revealed to have been perfect saints too! With Vin's whole 'everyone will betray you' thing, turns out, no one ever betrays her even a little nor did they EVER betray her!! The issue for me wasn't the 'lack of emotionallity' it was the content of what Sanderson told me in no uncertain terms.
I'd be interested to see if Will's opinion that the book wasn't really /saying/ anything changes if he reads the last two books because I felt the same way about book 1, then the next two books really fleshed out that Sanderson was definitely saying something, but it was so abhorrently antithetical to all my morals that I almost wish he'd missed the mark entirely and his books were just accidentally pushing really bad politics rather than him hammering home with no nuance 'nope, this is what you should be taking from this book: this horrifically disgusting theme that I'm telling you is good, actually'.
I think bringing up Wheel of Time really shoots Gina in the foot, though, because Robert Jordan actually worldbuilds and has diversity and depth in his world, cultures, sub-cultures, and the types of characters he writes. His world actually shows the consequences of past actions and how cultures intertwine due to the history of the world and you get that starting in book 1. Obviously worlds deepen the more you read about them, but Will and Maria are right: Sanderson's worldbuilding, even in book 1, could have had actual depth rather than the veneer of intricacy which is all actually just window-dressing. (Also, books 2 and 3 don't make the worldbuilding better, it makes it much, much worse). I think Gina was missing their point that after 1,000 years of this new atmosphere and world structure, that would influence things, the world wouldn't look like our world plus magic - it felt like Gina was thinking they wanted more lore when really, what they wanted was for the world to feel deeper than set dressing.
Suffice it to say, I forced myself to finish this trilogy, hated what Sanderson believes with my entire soul, and will never pick up another Sanderson book ever again.
(and the utter LACK of female characters???? Honestly unforgivable)
2 things:
Please tell me you don’t like red rising.
What is it about Brandon’s beliefs that he expressed within the book that you hate so much? I’m not a fan of Mormonism but I didn’t see any in the book lol
@@NotYourCitizenAnymore 1) Never read Red Rising. 2) The end of book 2 and the entirety of book 3 is full-hog "Well, you gotta give it to Hitler, actually" when no, no you really do not. The Lord Ruler was disgusting - we do not need to spend every single waking second 'thanking' him for his twisted 'help' for a problem he himself caused. He literally remade the world - there was no reason to create any of the monsters the way he did, there was no reason for him to castrate an entire race and control their reproduction, there was no reason to create a permanent underclass, there was no reason to create an entire people who would all commit mass suicide when he told them to, there was no reason to only have your magic be awoken by lethal physical abuse, there was no reason to create the koloss at all. It again, felt like Sanderson had a cool idea for a setting and tried to reverse-engineer it to make sense, but it just...doesn't make sense whatsoever. If he had left it at that and not tried to moralize it and tell the reader 'see, the Lord Ruler wasn't actually all bad after all!' then it might have been slightly better, but the villain would still have been a maniacally flat evil person who tortured people for fun but at least I wouldn't be horrified that Sanderson keeps trying to tell us all those things were 'justified, actually'.
And that's not taking into consideration his deplorable writing of women where out of the total of 4, one is an annoying know-it-all who thinks she knows how to run a kingdom because she's read some biographies and then dies to further a man's character, one is just there to warm the bed of an old man and get her daddy to send his army where her old man boyfriend needs it, one was only there to bring a man back from madness, and the other was the super OP main character who killed herself because her husband died.
@@Neremworld just because I had just finished that book and thought it was so terrible and yet so praised like they are saying about Mistborn.
Was looking for someone to agree with me about Red rising because it seems harder to find criticism of that story 🤣
Drink every time Maria "explains" what Gina means or thinks
Honestly, I think the one place that Brandon dropped the ball in this series was when he introduced compounding. I think that basically breaks the magic system and makes it way too overpowered. Like, a steel compounder would literally be like Quicksilver from X-Men, gold compounders are literally invincible, etc.
Excited you guys are doing Mistborn! I figured out pretty early on that Brandon Sanderson's writing style just isn't for me and it was great to understand why through your review. It was also great to hear that the story worked for Gina. I would've liked to understand why because I'm open to being convinced that I didn't see everything good about a story, but I left feeling that if you liked the book then great, but if not, there's nothing really tangible that will change your mind besides the purely subjective experience of it. It was much easier to understand why Will and Maria didn't like the book than why Gina did.
Completely agree. I am fascinated by the mistborn hyoe because I really dont get it, but I really want to understand why its so welliked even by usually critical readers.
I love how you have different visions and opinions about the book, great discussion 👌👌
I started reading stormlight archive FIRST and then likw halfway through the books read Mistborn because I i throughly enjoyed myself and wanted to try other stuff Sanderson had done. Throughly disappointed. Just luke they said it was fine and i felt nothing as nd no drive to keep with the sage. It's very interesting to see how much growth Sanderson had between his different works. I'm so curious as to the experience people who read the "right way" had?
YES! FINALLY! My favourite podcast meets my favourite author.
I’d be really interested to see your guy’s thoughts on the rest of the series or any of Brandon’s other books. I liked the first one well enough but my enjoyment fell off really hard during the second and third while most people think they get progressively much better. Mistborn era 2 was also a big disappointment imo. I’ve come to realize I’m not really a Sanderson fan I’m just a Stormlight Archive fan, the difference between those series is night and day I don’t understand how anyone thinks Mistborn is better than or even close to Stormlight quality unless they’re coming at it purely from a place of personal preference. Would love to see you read Stormlight someday, maybe by 2030 lmao
Mistborn is a cool story imo but has a bunch of new author mistakes and tropes
I'm not sure why exactly stuff like D&D magic that just does stuff because it can, is different from this metal magic system. As explained it seems not to be tied to things actually connected to the properties of the metal itself...so it is in fact just doing things just because it can. It just has a middle step involved where some guy shoves metal down his throat. Neither are better but it seems like they are virtually the same exact thing.
You don't have to read this if you care at all about spoilers, but
Within the isolated world of mistborn (Scadrial) the power system(s) were created by vessels of deific power that alters their perceptions and thoughts. The powers are linked to the metals based on the choices of a very old god, versus every magic spell being described as a "manipulation of the weave". The metals are used as "keys" to allow the user to tap the omnipresent power of Preservation to achieve various results.
disagree. If someone drinks a vial of pewter they aren't going to suddenly grow wings.
I think there was change in plan, like he had planned to kill the nobles, but then he changed his mind cuz of vin. They taught each other things. Saying there was no development would be wrong
I’d be curious to know if there’s a correlation between a reader’s phantasia (vividness of mind visualization/imagery, on the scale of aphantasia to hyperphantasia) and their desired level of emotionality within a text.
Heres my experience: I struggle to imagine environments and visuals, but I am extremely good at picking up emotional subtext.
I like when visuals are described to me in detail. I hate, however, when thoughts and emotions are overtly stated and explained.
I know this is a long video and i'm totally nitpicking, but Will is constantly asking for more writing and consideration on material conditions and then he says "i'm not sure why the city skaa are so different from the plantation skaa". I don't even know how to respond to that, besides pointing out that being literally whipped as you work is less empowering than being able to steal or con or work on your own.
I really enjoyed Mistborn. It's not my favorite Sanderson novel, nor my favorite series, but it holds a special place in my heart. I disagree with some of the points being presented here, but I feel it's just a matter of taste.
LOL, no, Will, you're spot on about Sanderson being Mormon (or LDS) and having a limited view/understanding of the world and how it actually works, especially since Mistborn was published almost two decades ago. I know from personal experience.
I completely understand why it it doesn't occur to most people, even other POC because it's not even a common term heard in historical media. But spook was used in the US as a racial slur for black people. And its just so jarring to reading about a lovable little boy in a scene and then just a casual slur as a nickname jump out every couple sentences and a term of endearment and familiarity.
Yeah this is a slur I've heard before and it was really jarring. I think the reason people brush past it is because all members of the crew have nicknames of that flavour, so it just hides among them (along with the fact that he is white). But when you know, it is impossible not to see, especially with him also speaking a dialect most people can't understand.
Lol how old are you for "spook" to be a slur you feel "jarred by" in an6 capacity.
this whole video summed up my biggest issue with The Way of Kings; you gave me the words to say what I really didn't like about that book - the straightforwardness makes everything aggressively okay. I wasn't moved, and I didn't particularly care about anything in the book. Not the magic system, not the characters, and certainly not the plot. After 260 pages, I was ready to admit maybe I'm just not a Sanderson girlie. I felt absolutely nothing and just gave up, and haven't picked up another Sanderson book since.
You are probably correct, it's not for you.
For example every time I go back to a Sanderson novel, I feel very good reading it because it feels like I'm back to a comfy place where things are stated simply and I can just focus on the plot and characters.
On the opposite end of the spectrum there is the Kingkiller Chronicles where every time I read a book, I feel drained because there is a disconnect between the quality of the prose and what actually happens in the plot. I always come out of them feeling like I just read something great, but I could never praise a scene for having stuck with me so I also feel cheated in a sense. The Wise Man's Fear in particular gave me this impression that the prose bamboozled me into enjoying a pretty bland story.
Sanderson's prose feels comfy to me in comparison.
44:00 why would they advertise themselves to be targeted, just to imitate the lord ruler?
Sanderson painting grisaille, but forgetting to add color cause he's colorblind. Also, on his skill level, just because he did something intentionally doesn't mean his writing is good. I feel like most books that are poorly realized are published on purpose/the writer didn't have the technique or skills to portay the tale more effectively.
For me the whole mistborn trilogy- and it gets worse as it goes along - shows waaaaaaaay too much of the author's hand it didn't feel like I was reading a story anymore. When I found out he was a mormon man I was like, yeah I could guess that real easy, and also I walked away feeling like I had some really disturbing revelations about how certain people view the world that I would never want to see through their eyes again. The strings being pulled behind the scene were painfully visible to the point of being difficult to enjoy characters or see their actions as character actions and the world was being constructed rather than existing. I think that's the best way I can put it? I'd never been so painfully aware a story was being told by another person before. I know it was like the first book he actually wrote even if it wasn't the first he's published and he's changed a lot as a person since, but except for one character that doesn't show up till book 2... yeah... I did have another character I really liked but Sanderson's insistence on pairing everyone up into the most forced heteronormative straight couple relationships when he can't write romance to save his life put a reeeaaal damper on that despite adoring both them and their love interest separately.
I also foudn the 'subversive' aspect of it really shallow where it was like i was still reading the exact sorta story it was trying to subvert. I dunno if that was his intention or just a marketing gimmick, though.
Am I the only one who thought they were talking about a different type of balls at first😅
I was so confused for like 60 seconds 😭
I read these books years ago and I remember liking them but also thinking they were dense and too long my brain just skipped over the exposition training sequences and out of the three books my favorite character is Tensoon the "dog"
These were my least favorite Sanderson books. It took me like 2 years to get through Mistborn and I honestly only did because I broke down and got the audiobook 😭 I loved Elantris and Warbreaker tho & I’m enjoying the Stormlight Archive 😅
Sanderfans always argue you just need to read one more book and then you’ll ‘get it’. I fell into their trap and read the whole trilogy. It only gets worse! 🫠🫠🫠
God shalow worldbuilding by the 3rd book it was so bad I had to take breaks to rant to friends. Still waited for it to click in to place at the end of a trilogy. And it made less and less sense.
Oh yes on the fantasy subreddit people keep telling me this
As someone who knew 0 opinions on the mistborn books prior to reading I’m a bit over half way through the well of ascension rn and I think its demonstrably better than the final empire was lol
@@vallano8970that's fascinating to me, because I think WoA is one of Sanderson's worst books.
It`s like saying Tolkien is bad at world building, because someone read only the Hobbit. Let`s judge why the world is like that without finishing the trilogy to understand why really it`s like that, because there is a reason. You have the right not to like it, in that case if you want something magical comming out of the blue, just so you feel entertained, go read Alice in Wonderland. If you don`t want to read a trilogy, why start it? It`s not a trap.
What is the book they are talking about at 33:32? There’s a character named Jocelyn?
The Kushil's Legecy, by Jacqueline Carey
They're talking about the first book I think
Guys you should read First Law by Joe Abercrombie I BEG YOU! Plus yall gonna LOVE the audiobooks!
Nice review guys. I never really looked at Mistborn as critically as y'all, since it's among the stories I liked more. I found William's views interesting, though mine are the opposite. Strangely enough, even as a non-religous atheist, who finds faith-pandering distasteful in fiction, I thought it was done well here, with a message that even a secular person can relate to. *SPOILER* The Christification of Kelsier was an excellent illustration of how a mythology may've been built, which has been kind of the theme of this whole book series, a.k.a "there is _some_ truth to every religion." If we were to overlap Kelsier's tale with that of Jesus, giving the observers of his alleged resurrection the benefit of the doubt, I think Sanderson is exploring the possibility of "maybe the people saw someone else instead of the risen Christ, that made them believe their saviour had returned." Of course, there's no Kandra magic or divine necromancy IRL, in so far as we can tell, but there may yet be alternate explanations to historical beliefs, lost to the ravages of time, and generations of indoctrination. Or it's all made-up.
It is early in his backlist. He wrote a some novels that were never published prior to Mistborn.
I heard (but can't guarantee that it's true) that originally he was writing it Grimdark and then changed it to be lighter. So maybe that is why it feels Grimdark but it isn't. This would explain why the prologue is much more grimdark than the rest of the book.
Bio, from biographical. Pic, from picture. Bio-pic= biographical picture. Coined in Variety magazine in the 1940s. Bi-opic, in medical terms, would be the capacity to have dual-focal vision.
If you want to see culture, architecture, fashion and art you can try Stormlight
I agree with Will 100%. His rants were so validating. I read Mistborn a year ago, and found it so aggressively meh that I havent been able to force myself to try another sanderson. I'd rather read a terrible book than a book competent enough to be boring. It felt like a solid concept and outline of a story, that instead of being fleshed out in writing, was rendered in flat cardboard cut outs. I'm so glad I'm not alone on this. People love him so much I thought maybe I just picked up the wrong one. Hearing why Gina liked it let me know I'm just the exact wrong type of audience for him. Without emotional stakes and relevance, I'm too disconnected to care what happens, especially when the concepts also don't feel explored enough to me.
Yes, it was validating for me too! I actually read TFE over the summer bc I'm getting into fantasy and a bunch of other booktubers, who I *thought* had similar taste as me, they were all gushing about how mistborn is one their favorite series 🧐So now I don't listen to them anymore lol
@@flowerpixel That's exactly why I read it last year. The betrayal I felt 😂😭
@@flowerpixeloh my goodness i feel this constantly. Even booktubers i thought were pretty critical readers like me adore mistborn. WHY??
@@mikanchan322 Damn, must suck having bad taste.
@@kingragnarok7302 It does suck sometimes that I struggle to enjoy books that are not written as well as they could have been. On the other hand, it makes my appreciation of books that are very wellwritten even greater. I will still recommend Mistborn to readers who I know arent as picky as I am.
As a big Sanderson fan (I've read all of his main series and most of his standalones) I do understand where you're coming from with your criticisms and with mistborn specifically I think one of the main reasons it worked so well for me is the fact that I read them as a teenager and did a lot of the emotional work required for that element of emotionality myself.
However, I do think Sanderson has improved significantly as writer in over the last two decades.
Also concerning your comments about the tone of mistborn vs its grimdark world that is actually something he has called out himself.
As for potential recommendations:
A recent book that is not too long that also has a very different tone and style is Tress of the Emerald sea, which came out this year.
With this Sanderson was going for a more whimsical and fairy tale esque story.
Another option would be Skyward which is a YA scifi that is fairly recent has as far as I am concerned some of Sanderson's best character work and just does a really good job with its side characters.
Skyward is also in first person, so I'm actually really curious what your thoughts on it are given your track record with first-person narration.
Both this recommendations also have more than 4 female characters in speaking roles 😅
Omg what a coinkeedink! I literally just started Mistborn a few days ago, now I face the dilemma of listening to this whole video and getting spoilers or waiting to finish the book...
Same lol
Despite two thirds of the podcast hosts not being thrilled with it, just judging by the description and the gripes you had with it, it would probably be a series I'd enjoy since I'm not necessarily a character-focused reader. The whole alomancy thing sounds very intriguing and I love hard magic systems that make sense. As far as taking our world and adding some magic to it... well, Kushiel kind of did that and it worked great, so I don't think it would be a problem. It might actually make it easier for a new reader to get into the series without being too confused about the sheer abundance of new races/titles/attributes. Honestly, if I start reading it, I have a feeling it might become my newest obsession. I'd also be curious to read more of his recent stuff, but since I know most of it is tied together I'd feel compelled to start at the beginning so it all makes more sense. But ooof... the sheer output of this author makes it a daunting task. With my limited free time, I might never catch up to current books.
One of my biggest drawbacks of the books I've read from Sanderson it's that he doesn't know how to write women. Vyn feels like a guy most of the times and when she is feminine he checkmarks all the existing cliches and bad stereotypes of women. I literally was highlighting all those stereotypes as I was reading this trilogy. I agree it was too long and I just don't like his characters. I do love his world building and his online lectures about writing. I just don't think he is that good when it comes to his books.
I really needed a critical commentary like yours about this books because I feel most people just put Sanderson on a pedestal and I see many flaws in his writing. I remember finishing the trilogy angered at so many things and looking for content that at least talked about what Mistborn trilogy lacked of and I just found one video and that channel no longer exists 🫣 it was really exasperating
But anyway, this was a great video ❤
Yes. YES.
I have a feeling like it isn't discussed much because he doesn't seem like a maliciously sexist person. I had a strong feeling that he was doing his best with Vin and just failing because of being clueless.
The result is the type of character I adore, but do not believe is a real person at all. Same as her husband(don't remember his name). Thousand years of conditioning to believe ska are barely human and he gets over it in like a chapter.
Lack of women in this world was so loud to me. Like empty spaces on canvas that noone bothered to paint. He adds more (meaning I remember 2) female characters with any kind of significant role and both of the seem as flat as Vin.
This video is very helpful for me understanding why people like this. I genuinely didn't get why anyone liked Sanderson before watching it.
If you want a newer (and much better imo) Sanderson book to try, he released Yumi and the Nightmare Painter earlier this year. It's a standalone novel, with only a few "Easter egg" type tie-ins from other books, and it's much shorter than his mega series entries as well. I would be interested to hear your thoughts as far as his growth as an author!
I agree with others (and I say this as a Sanderson fan) that Mistborn is one of his weakest books. I always recommend readers try Warbreaker first, because it’s a standalone but not his first. Stormlight Archive is amazing, but definitely not a good place for new Sanderson readers to start. That said, his YA series Skyward is actually my fave from him, though the last book isn’t out yet.
I personally liked The Final Empire (I too prefer a less sterile writing style but I can still enjoy the book for what it is), then went into The Well of Ascension and profusely disliked it, so it's going to be a while before I touch another Sanderson :')
But, as always, your criticism is greatly appreciated!! I love your analysis and how civil your discussions are, as a fellow critical reader :D
I have a theory, there are three roads to success.
Be the first.
Be the best.
Be accessable. Sort of being unchallenging without giving away the game about being unchallenging.
Based on the original Mistborn trilogy Sanderson falls squarely in the latter, imho.
(Spoilers)
This series had a scene in particular that made absolutely sure I would read every Brandon piece out there. In book 3 the scene when we get for the first time the POV from Zane, and his inner dialogue with "God". Fuck that hit me so hard. If I get even a slight chance of feeling the way I felt during that chapter again, I will read every goddamn long book he writes.
Stormlight Archives was also quite a gut punch for me. Shallan the female POV character in this series is really well done, in my opinion, and was very much relatable in her narration.
Love your videos guys ❤
Book 2 made absolutely sure I would never read anything of sanderson.
You are right.
@@migmitI’m a Malazan fan. If you know what does that mean you know I read quality. Sanderson’s worlds improved drastically.
@@nazimelmardi I don't care about worlds. But after that dog scene, and after learning that Sanderson himself thinks it is normal and rational (from author's commentary on his website), I can't trust I won't walk face-first into something equally disgusting.
@@migmit what exactly are you referring to? And I mean both? “Normal”?
Sanderson has admitted that he wrote himself into a corner with the ending of mistborn and ended up using something that was meant to be slowly introduced in the next book. The prose and worldbuilding does get better once you get to his stormlight archive series.
I was obsessed with these books as a teenager and as I grew up I began to actively hate them. The biggest thing that caused me to stop connecting with them was watching The Matrix trilogy for the first time. Basically the entire plot from these books is lifted from the matrix and sanitized to remove the queer subtext (which branderson probably didn’t even notice was there).
You can also see some very Mormon/evangelical creationism attitudes in the way the magic system has become “polluted” and weakened over time. Even though that’s not how genetic traits work in the real world that’s a way creationists think they work. There’s also the very gross idea that the skaa were originally created genetically inferior, that’s just kinda racist.
In the second mistborn series there is also a background character that is a lesbian and one of the main characters is a man who has a crush on her. He constantly sexually harasses her and it is played for laughs. This literally made me sick as a lesbian myself. No thank you Brandon Sanderson for the representation, you just used a horrific situation as a joke.
Balls...
reread this book this year and I enjoyed the hell out of it. Most of these critiques kinda just felt nitpicky.
Hi! I've been watching your videos for awhile and I had a question,
I heard advice somewhere that no chapter should be completely dedicated to character development and the plot must always be moving somewhat or readers will get bored. Is this valid advice? I can't tell.
I'm just a rando on the internet but for what it's worth in my opinion no. Stories have multiple layers, like themes, main plot, side plots, all the different character arcs, character reationships, worldbuilding and possibly others I can't think of right now. Try to write scenes and chapters that progress at least two or three of these simultaneously, but one of them doesn't always have to be the plot. imo boring scenes are often ones that only progress one of these, i.e. a long infodump about worldbuilding (versus for example a conversation between two characters that does worldbuilding but also reveals something about both characters' personalities and progresses their relationship in some way).
@@kragary Thanks!
Have to admit... As much as I probably shouldn't want this, I'd love to have three different perspectives of readers actually analyze and debate my work to such a degree. I'd be wincing and cringing the whole time watching, but it'd be such useful feedback.
I can feel Gina getting more tired the longer this goes on 😂 Honestly she's better than me because when y'all hate a book I love I just don't listen at all 😅 im weak and i admit it
So thanks for being a trooper Gina! Will & Maria do not go easy 😅
My experience with Sanderson is that I like his YA stuff way more than his "adult" books. I find his writing style works much better for the YA genre and I just end up enjoying those stories more.
omg FINALLY so excited for this
What is that series with the snow scene called?
Kushiel's Legacy, I think it was.
Mistborn actually is his second book. Elantris was his first. If you want a masterpiece, read Stormlight Archive. He has written dozens of books, but Mistborn is very early in his bibliography, so Will is wrong.
His writing his improved a bit over time, but the process hasn't. It's still very mechanical. You can still see all the seams of the construction. And characters are still his weakness.
Also, everything is so loooooong. Stormlight is even more bloated. With no book below 1000 pages. That's also where the weak prose really hurts. I can take mid writing in a more concise story. But thousands of pages of blandness is not fun for me. Good technical writing can make passages where nothing much happens interesting all on its own.
Sanderson wrote several unpublished books before Elantris
stormlight archives feel even more like they were written by a teen or a very young writer, when it comes to the emotional logic/maturity of the main characters. he goes all out on the magic and world building, but his characters did not get better. maybe even worse.
@@lesyablackbird agree to disagree.
@@eleanarussell5595 lol that's fine. i am mostly made up of contrary opinions. so this is normal. i liked bits of it!
im 54 mins into this video and this is a rare occasion where im struggling to finish it. Not trying to be mean but the blond girl is doing the thing sanderfans always do that eventually put me off all his work. there is this insane defensiveness of sanderson's flaws as a writer. Every flaw they turn into some hidden strength. and 54 mins into this video, it sounds like she would be just as happy if this was a power point presentation with only bullet points.
Mistborn is written like a video game. it has the pacing of video game narrative and it requires the same inferences of story-telling devices to keep it coherent. if you told me this was written by a 19 year old and was their first attempt, i'd be incredibly impressed. but this is written by the guy chosen to complete the WoT series yet it feels so hollow and devoid of nuance that i always warn ppl off of mistborn when they want to start a fantasy series.
I think Sanderfans, such as myself, get defensive precisely because people use such demeaning language to describe his books. It legitimately feels like the people who hate Sanderson's writing and the people who love it have not read the same text sometimes, with the way people describe it as if it were on the same level of quality as ACOTAR or something.
@@atreides213 sure that maybe true. but it also does not negate the fact that sanderson fans routinely handwave away significant problems with his books as is being done in this video continuously.
so how about you meet me halfway right here and now. I'll admit that sanderson is a great storyteller. he has great epic endings to his books and always has interesting ideas about his worlds. But i think he's very bad at dialogue, clumsy with his intrigue-based plots and relies too heavily on his big endings to make up for bad pacing.
can we meet in the middle and at least say all these things are fair praise/critiques without the need to attack another author/fanbase(like acotar)? *extends youtube comment-section olive branch*
@@ddookhar I can agree that some of his books have a tendency to drag, including the first third of this book. And while I think his dialogue isn't terrible, especially in later books like the Stormlight Archives, there are definitely very clunky sections, and most of his attempts at comedy are at least moderately cringeworthy. I'm going to have to hard disagree about his intrigue-based plots, though, I think he does a fantastic job with intrigue most of the time.
@@atreides213 fair enough but also thanks for making my point for me. I gave praise for things i think sanderfans would want detractors to acknowledge at the least & some very soft critiques that i thought sanderfans would be willing to concede are problematic. but instead you did the thing i initially complained sanderfans of doing; being overly defensive and unwilling to bear any criticism of Lord Brandon. Im glad you find significant enjoyment in Lord B's books. Im sad you seem to have a low opinion of acotar(who's fandom is only marginally less annoying than sanderson's). And i do wish Lord Brando keeps gifting you more books than any single fandom can ever know what to do with. But maybe, just maybe, have some sympathy for those that want Better instead of More even if you dont agree.
@@ddookhar I literally acknowledged the points you made that I thought were valid, and respectfully pushed back on the point I disagreed with. I thought you were trying to be respectful earlier, but thanks for confirming to me that you were instead being a condescending snob. I may have trashed ACOTAR in passing (a series I actually read and enjoy despite its--in my opinion--poor writing) but I wouldn't have the gall to talk to fan of the series the way you talked to me.
Your final paragraph in this reply was so arrogant, patronizing, and smug that it's clear to me you're just a person who likes to feel superior to others and treat your own taste as objective fact. I was like that once, but I grew out of it when I was like twenty. Hope you do the same.
Yes! It's Friday! New ep of UTT! 🙌🧡📚
I read mistborn after reading most of his stormlight series (great books on a character level, terrible politics on oppression lol) and i didnt love it but kel’s martyrdom and painting of himself as a jesus like figure to prompt rebellion seriously irritated me at the end, esp as an actual, real life minority so im glad you guys talked about that
Agreed on the ... somewhat tactless handling of politics of oppression 🙃but I think, and correct me if I'm wrong it's been a while since I read these books, the point of Kal's arc IS that his tendency towards martyrdom is a major flaw that he needs to work on? That his deeply ingrained Hero Complex is a harmful trauma response that warps his view of the world and himself? That seemed to me what his development was getting at. Especially by the time we get to "Rhythm of War" I think ...?
@@NaritaZaraki well, I mean, if Sanderson doesn't understand the nuances of Marxist intersectionality, the oppression narrative, and benefits of social justice through the lens of Marxism...
Maybe he should not comment on it.
Right?
Or... maybe he knows what a bunch of bullshit it is, and inserts his understanding into his stories...
And by the way...what the actual f*ck are "the politics of oppression?" Is that another worthless deconstruction you learned from your Frosh Poli-sci prof?
lmfao. Tactless...you can not make this sh*t up.
oh boy, I'm surprised these comments are not flooded with rabid sandofans. I have heard not great things about how they react to any kind of criticism of his work. But this was a great discussion!
In terms of the magic system, it seems very similar to, if not based on, DnD where instead of verbal, somatic, and material components, you just need material components (metals) to cast your "spells". That emotion controlling thing is similar to Calm Emotions. And being able to see 5 seconds into the future is literally the 9th level spell Foresight. This is not necessarily a bad thing, I just agree with Will that this not something new or cool.
I really enjoyed it this one. I got invested in the story, I was really curious about the world, and I liked the magic system. I gave it 4 stars. What I didn't like was the pacing and some of the characters. The pacing was weird. The first 30% of the book it was so slow, and I was still so confused about the world. Other times things happen way too quickly: Vin is instantly good at pretending to be a noble, her feelings for Elend came out of nowhere, etc. Then all the hell breaks loose in the last 5% of the book. Also so much was happening off-page. About the characters: I liked Vin and I instantly connected to her but I can't say the same for the rest of them. Kelsier supposedly is this very charismatic leader, but he didn't come across as such, at least for me. I didn't like him that much honestly, I preferred Marsh. And then the rest of the characters: Dox, Breeze, Ham, Clubs, Spook, etc feel like NPCs, I feel like I know them so little, thus I don't really care about them.
Sanderson writes, in my mind, a mechanics guy not a systems guy
like relationships feel baffling
it seems to me that Will wants more thematic correspondence. like if say, the magic system was set in medieval europe and the metals followed the alchemical relationships to the planets to spheres of life?
I’m only partway through but Gina feels too defensive for this😭
i disagree. Will and Maria are often way too prescriptive with their opinions. I feel Gina is pushing back against that prescriptive attitude. It doesn't become too glaring when everyone on the podcast are aligned with their judgments about a book. but it sure shows when they have someone on who disagrees with them. that's really what this podcase always have been, actually, personal judgments and opinions despite Will insisting he is 'objective always', when really, no one can be.
p/s for context, i have never read a single Sanderson book.
@@phangkuanhoong7967 I'm honestly really glad someone pointed this out. I'm often one to defend the act of nitpicking, especially the prescriptive kind, because I really do believe that if one can honestly find THAT many legitimate nitpicks within a story, then those small, seemingly inconsequential things actually do become a real problem. Yet, I rarely find that most people who do nitpick, actually fall into the camp of those who have discovered dozens and dozens of legitimate miniature gripes with the story they're critiquing. I do appreciate this podcast and how it acts as a harsher side of the sliding scale of literature critique, but I also wish they would actually try and critique the story itself as much as they nitpick everything that surrounds it, which I rarely see them do. I get that if the foundation is weak, the story suffers, I really do. Yet, I think there's value in allowing a story to be flawed and recognize its triumphs if it manages to balance on that weaker foundation without toppling over. I don't think Will, Maria, and Katie see stories that way, but I wish they would at least try to be a little bit more focused on the meat of the story, rather than going nitpick scavenging all while pretending to be objective in their notice of issues.
Hard agree
I think it's rough for anyone to talk about something you love with two people who dislike it and who can talk circles around you. You easily end up in an attack/ defense situation
I think senses arent too overpowered, like emotional manipulation could be. Like emotional manipulation could have one that makes you really happy and euphoric or others, and another to make feel misterable till depressed. Emotional manipulation shoud have different subsets how it affects. One could be a really high aphrotisiacum hormonal power. Agree if you have emotional manipulation, you probably need to devide it to be more specific in effects. Like the high one that also can be drugs, the love potions that can just have more control, or euphotisiacim.
And one to make you really bad till depressed and can only make people suffer.
The enhancement of senses makes a lot of sense if you combine, like magnetism and seeing far can be broken.
I can read 250k fanfiction stories in a single day, but I'm one of those people who couldn't get past the prologue of Mistborn because of the multiple POVs in it. (It was either 3 or 5, can't remember) I need to connect to a character to get into a book and with so many switches in a short amount of time, it was a sign of poor writing to me. EDIT: just to clarity since I think it'll be taken the wrong way. I'm not saying the author is a poor writer. Multiple POVs switching in a short amount of time has always been a sign of poor writing to me. In this case, it happens in a prologue where they felt unimportant in the long run. Why should I care? A writer needs to make me care about the characters and this book fails to hook me enough.
That's more a question of subjective taste in reading
I just started listening to the audiobook and I'm completely lost as far as POV goes. I didn't even realize the prologue had more than 2 POVs... I LOVE multi-POV stories but I don't understand why any author would jump around SO MUCH with NO WARNING. Each POV should have its own chapter IMO.