Got to respect Sanderson for taking the high road. Seriously, Sanderson is 100% right, we should NOT attack the writer of this article and should shame anyone that does. It's easy to disagree with article's content, but they are free to think and publish their view no matter how nonsensical it may appear to any reader of the article. Commentary, like this video, is exactly the right way to discuss this article.
Sanderson is a nice man, nicer than I would have been in that situation. Also, not everyone from SF, CA acts like this unbelievable d o u c h e who wrote that article. From the tone, he's probably one of those insufferable Cow Hollow d * c k s. 😒
Sanderson is doing exactly what a christian should do... take the high road because that's where you live. I'm sure Brandon was tempted to bite back, but he fought that off, and has demonstrated mercy in the face of injustice and malice.
It actually sounds like the person who wrote that article was looked after really well by Sanderson & his family. Brought to his home, a convention, a theme park... staying in the car talking about different things... etc etc... What gets me the most is the idea that Sanderson was super kind to this person, and they trashed him and all of his fans for a few cheap clicks
I’d be fine with the article if it truly was only trashing Sanderson’s books, if that’s really what the individual felt. But I completely agree that it feels as though the writer was treated very kindly, and then he went out of his way to be rude and condescending for no reason
@@ebnovels Exactly! Sanderson's reply is so genuine and kind as well. I haven't read any of his books yet, so I'm not even a fan, and yet I can see that the article is rude and that Sanderson seems to be a genuine person who didn't deserve that. His family and friends definitely didn't deserve it either.
Why the Wired guy claims he almost cried when Sanderson's son salts his food is just beyond me. What does that have to do with Sanderson's ability as an author. The guy needs help. A lot of it. And he should never be a journalist/writer.
I always assumed that one of the reasons publications don't write about Sanderson very much is that they don't need to... Sanderson is very active with updates, the State of Sanderson, his TH-cam videos, podcasts, lessons as an instructor/professor, updates on Reddit, etc. You don't need to dig very much to find out everything you could want to know about Sanderson, his process, his goals, his progress, what's coming next, etc. He puts it all out there. He's one of if not the most forthcoming open and honest authors out there.
This kind of makes it sound like the media should act as his publicist, I think the question was why there's never been a personal profile of him, and while that could be answered by his videos and lectures, I think if the answer truly is he's not a very interesting guy, good for him. The less interesting your life is the better you're probably doing
@@futurestoryteller I don't think the media should act as his publicist and I also don't think it's accurate to say there has never been a personal profile of him. He has a Wikipedia page, a subreddit, a TH-cam channel, his own personal website, a blog he updates, etc. He has a whole team of people that work for him. He has multiple publishers he works with. There are countless videos on TH-cam about him and his books including in depth video essays. One of the arguments made by the writer of that article was that "no major publication" had written about Sanderson when he appears on Yahoo news, Google news, TH-cam news channels as well as non news channels, etc. Magazines in print and online are not as popular as they once were and certainly aren't the way most people consume their media and I think it's a little disingenuous of this writer to be like, "well he's not well known in the circle I run in so I'm going to disregard ALL of the fans I met at a con dedicated specifically to Sanderson, his books, his world, and his fanbase and assume that he's not popular in my specific circles because he's not a good writer." He literally noted the fact that (according to him) no one he worked with at Wired knew who Sanderson was as though that proved his claim that he must not be a good writer. There are countless people on the internet talking about Sanderson and his works DAILY just because they are not the high brow publications this writer referred to doesn't mean they are not important or valid. I think the fact that he had the most successful kick-started ever without having been published in any "major publication" shows that maybe that's not necessary to be successful.
@@tabitash6394 This is quite the rant, apologies for going even longer, I was trying to figure out how to respond to this because I can't quite tell if you're under some misconception about the degree to which I find any exception to what you're saying overall, but I think for the sake of good faith attempts at critical examination we should interrogate all sides to see where the holes are, and in this case I think it's whether or not you're really willing to see the point here. A Wikipedia page, subreddit, TH-cam channel, personal website, or blog are not remotely profiles. Some of them are neutral, which profiles generally aren't. A profile is a human interest story, which is by default emotionally engaged with by both the writer and their reading audience. It is not "objective." So a Wikipedia page, ostensibly a listed accounting of cold hard facts, or scattered fan discussions of multiple (mostly positive) opinions on Reddit would not qualify. But while they aren't objective, they generally aren't - by default - written by an insider to the observed. Sanderson himself is in full control of about 80%-90% of the content you mentioned. If a person was quite a notable historical figure, as far as their personal accomplishments were concerned, and you recognized the oddity that no one, in the public sphere - as far as you could tell - had ever written a biography about them; if when confronted with the knowledge that they *had* written a book about _themselves,_ rational and thoughtful consideration would not logically bring you to conclude that the issue had been resolved. Especially if that book were about their favorite recipes for making french toast. There are some problems with the bad faith assumptions being made here, and full disclosure, I fully concede that the author of the article is not being fair. The observation that Sanderson having the most successful kickstarter in history proves that "maybe" you don't need a public profile to be successful, assumes by inference that the goal of the profile is to affect the trajectory of his career in some way... which it isn't. That might be the private wish of the person who writes one, but it is not the purpose of their existence. Now I understand the desire to paint the celebrity icons we identify with as fans, with a broad brush as "just like us" but - as I'm surprised to have to point out anyone - if asking why a "major publication" hasn't done a profile on Sanderson, only to write one about how "lame" he is seems "elitist" it's worth pointing out that Sanderson is the elite. That's *why* there was an idea to write an article about him. He's a wildly popular, extremely prolific, traditionally published multi-millionaire author. I'm surprised how much weight Kickstarter has in distorting this reality. Just because he went through independent channels for personal reasons one time (and succeeded - despite his success imagine that!) does not make him some scrappy underdog getting dogged down by "the man" here, and the fact that this article is even a little bit taken that way despite no one knowing this author's name and, the self-fulfilling prophecy of Sanderson Kickstarter goals demonstrates the overwhelming power of fandom preconception over objective thinking, and the benefits of being largely insulated from the public eye. When I say it sounds like you believe the media should act as his personal publicists, I say that because that's how it _sounds_ but that's not undone in any way by the resources you say act as appropriate substitutes for a Sanderson profile, or by your apparent assumptions about what a profile does, or what it "should be," such as to inform ignorant readers about his successes, or offer insights into why he is successful, or why so many people like his work etc. I sympathize; it's nuanced, of course the author of the Wired piece himself said he would like to understand Sanderson's success - it _can_ be any of those things, but it doesn't need to be any of them. He talks about that as just one of many avenues he feels he frustrated in trying to write a piece about Sanderson, that he personally thinks, makes for an interesting read. Here's what happened: some time back Sanderson started his ascension in the world of publishing, building through his proliferation a formidable fanbase with success after success that made him into a wealthy man who is also popular enough to politely request millions of dollars from as many strangers. This Wired writer just learned about about this and for the sake of his profession, wonders if there is untapped potential here to do a profile on Sanderson. Satisfied with his conclusion that this might as well be an editorial first, he asks his colleagues if they know anything about the guy, and when they don't, despite his own precenceptions he embarks on a journey to find anything interesting about Sanderson from his perspective, because after all... he's clearly a big name somehow, he's a best-selling author, there must be SOMETHING interesting about him. Then he decided there wasn't, but he needed to justify the expense, or he wasted all that time for nothing. That's it. That's pretty much all that happened. This is not to suggest that what the author did was okay, by all acounts that article was lazily-written, mean spirited, spiteful, petty and inane. But the only thing he really *has* to do in a profile is offer his personal opinions about the subject, and his personal opinion happened to be all of those things.
I’m 100% an atheist. The dude was clouded by his anti-mormon slant where that’s the only angle he was willing to approach their interactions Which is why he had difficulty saying literally anything else I don’t like religion. I can tolerate it. But geez… I hate bigotry like that article. I guess it’s super obvious when thrown against someone like Sanderson who actually tries to be nice lol But yeah. The author wanted sanderson to be his focal point through which he can criticise Mormonism He acted grossly, and criticised nothing. The most he did was condemnation by association That’s weak
Gosh. This journalist revealed much more about himself than he did about Sanderson. I think Sanderson's reputation will survive and most people will see this article for what it is. Thanks for pointing this out to us Elle.
This was exactly my thought. He showed so much of his own character through the article, you wonder if he even got a degree in journalism. Honestly, I think it's just a rage-bait article designed to farm clicks and interaction to boost their presence online, but it hurts their reputation more than Brandon's by far.
That's usually the case with opinion pieces - whatever they're trying to talk about is always secondary to what they say about themselves in the process.
Yes, the author is desperately trying to show some sort of superiority, this typically happens to those with the lowest self esteem trying to overcompensate. And being next to Sanderson made him feel really small.
This has to be the most dehumanizing article I've ever read. As someone who struggles with self esteem, I don't know what I'd do if someone just tore me down again and again with no filter. I hope Sanderson is okay. He's too genuine a person to deserve this.
I can’t imagine happily and passionately talking about my profession to someone who seems to want to know about it, only to have them mock me-and my fans-repeatedly
@@ebnovels No need to worry. As members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints we're used to being treated with this kind of disdain. It's been a thing throughout the history of the Church and Brandon is in himself pretty resilient. I'm sure he's fine.
The fact that Sanderson invited the person to his home, welcomed him to dinner, introduced him to sandersons family, and he has the gall to outright insult him and his faith, trying to diminish his succes as a writer is outrageous
Not to mention that many, MANY books are written at an 8th grade reading level...and done so intentionally to be approachable for more people. I definitely get annoyed with certain phrases and repeated words (adroit/adroitly anyone?) But I get annoyed with that in other books too. It's a small thing I can overlook. The story is what draws me in. And the characters. That's true of nearly any book. Does fantastic prose help? It may be a hook that gets me into a book, but if it continues throughout it? Just icing on top of the story cake!
I just finished reading one of Brandon Sanderson's novels, and I have to say, I'm really impressed with his writing style. Sanderson's choice to focus on storytelling rather than overly literary writing is exactly what makes his books so engaging. Unlike some literary writers who can be distracting with their excessive use of ornate language and convoluted sentence structures, Sanderson's writing is clear and concise, allowing the story to take center stage. It's refreshing to read a book where I'm not constantly being pulled out of the narrative by overly flowery language or self-indulgent literary references. Kudos to Sanderson for putting storytelling first and foremost.
It's a problem I see in academia too. So many authors are obsessed with regurgitating the thesaurus onto the page so that their work sounds "important". My dude, I will respect your research much more if it's explained clearly and concisely.
I'll use big words, or flowery words in my writing, BUT... the only reason to ever use uncommon words (or _any_ words) is to make your prose as precise and crammed full of meaning as you can make it. It should never be done thinking you're going to wow academia or anyone else with your intellectuality. Impressing the masses with words that sound "intellectual" is something a person that feels inadequate would do, not what an author wanting to tell a story should ever do.
I was enrolled in Sanderson’s class at BYU and I love Sanderson! He is a kind and passionate person who does his best and tries to always help others. He loves his family, his students, and his fans! Idk how anyone could speak so poorly of the guy!
I really want to push back on the idea that Sanderson is bad at writing. The point of writing is to transmit information from the author's head into the reader's. By this metric Sanderson is an amazing writer, I have rarely read action scenes explained in such a clear way. I can clearly picture what is happening at each moment during these scenes and that is something often lost when readers focus on the lack of things like flowery descriptions of buildings or trees.
I think what many people mean when they say "bad at writing" is that they find his prose to be lower quality. I certainly think it is more interested in being functional than pretty. It is about transmitting the information needed in the best way he can. And honestly like you I do enjoy it that way as well. I think it seems poor to many literary types as it is objectively somewhat simple and straightforward. What we like they dislike. Some writing exists to be pretty and I am sure that has value in itself. It is not my favourite type of writing but different strokes.
I do think his writing is not all that great in the technical sense (especially the dialogue in his earlier work). Good prose doesn't equal flowery, simple prose can be stunning too but Brandon's doesn't really do that either. Hear me out though, I don't think that's a problem? He doesn't HAVE to be amazing at everything, if his ideas and plots are strong then maybe he doesn't need to be an absolute wizard with prose.
What some people want is to read a paragraph, be so in awe at how the syllables were strung together that they sit worshiping the skill of the author for a few minutes while the meaning of the paragraph, if any, completely escapes them. They call this writing and demand that everyone else want this kind of entertainment as well.
If Sanderson is a bad writer than by default we, millions of his readers, have bad taste. Now that's a bald thing to say if you're a mediocre journalist who has never published a book. I guess the guy is simply jealous. BTW to me Sanderson is a good writer. Not every sentence is perfect and not all plots and characters are deep but there's much more to books than technical quality. In fact we all have dropped some good books in school because the were boring. Lawrence Durrell and Marcel Proust are amazingly good writers but the form hijacks the story. And what about other things like the vision, building tension or creating relatable characters or triggering emotional responses? Aren't these at least as important as perfect beautiful prose?
@@aaronhunyady Now let's not diss people who like well crafted prose either - they aren't snobs by default. I bet plenty of people exist who love complicated prose and also like Sanderson's stories!
I completely agree with you. I am mormon and I have been reading his books since I was 12 when I picked up a book from Costco by him and it had a cool cover and my mom would buy books from Costco because they are better priced sometimes for hard backs. It wasn't until college I learned he was mormon. There are loose connections where I can see the inspiration because of his background in the faith but he has never preached nor pushed his books to further religious ideology, even in his podcast is never a focus just an occasional side comment. My biggest issue with the article beside attacking religion was that instead of saying "that's such a unique perspective, tell me more how you see the world and is it because of your faith? " that's an interesting story, I'd read that no matter if he was atheist, Amish, or x, y, z. Because that's an interesting story to understand who he is. Or criticize him and his work which is also valid but to be so mean spirited about his character and lack of drama or gossip.... it leaves a bad taste and feels gross
1. He is an actual professor, re: his clothing 2. Tress of the Emerald Sea is one of the most heartfelt books I've read. He hit the highpoints in terms of "just the feels" there that I have only seen Robin Hobb/some others in the fantasy genre accomplish. 3. Read Tolkien in english(not a native speaker) when I was 11, all of GRRM before 13. Enjoyment is subjective. 4. I didn't know about the "pain" thing. And I wish I didn't learn about it this way. 5. I didn't even know he was Mormon before this, and I've read almost every book of his bar some short stories, and watched his lectures on TH-cam, and also some of his other uploads(no podcasts). He's not "very Mormon".
He _is_ very "mormon." Just not what the average person that dislikes the Church would think of when considering that. Other than that I think I agree with you. Pushing your beliefs on others isn't something he would do. He's content to just be an example of what he believes. So should the rest of us (be content with just being an example of what we believe). Our words and actions are far better teaching tools than _any_ kind of "hardcore preaching." This is the reason so many people hate religion... most of the people with strong beliefs want to push them on others with no regard to how they themselves are putting into action the very principles they try to push on others. That is just folly and foolishness in action. As the idiom goes, "Actions speak louder than words."
In regards to the professorial clothing discussion, it feels like Sanderson made a lighthearted self-deprecating joke to break the ice and this journalist decided to use it as an opportunity to take an unnecessary jab at what he wears and try to imply he's some kind of egomaniac. Which is just so disingenuous!
This piece was clearly written in bad faith, inexcusable for a journalist, putting all that aside though. What I simply cannot get over is the fact that this guy went to a man's HOUSE, met his wife, his son, ate his food etc etc etc and then still has the gall to write a piece such as this. Well, it tells me all I need to know about the person who wrote this article.
Sanderson wrote a response to this and said explicitly that this is what he found most hurtful. Apparently this guy went out of his way to act like Sanderson's friend.
I think the worst part was when he basically dragged a guy that was very likely in recovery. I couldn't shake the feeling the author was looking down his nose at a guy who found inspiration to change his life after reading WOK, and decided to name his kid after a character that likely gave him strength. What an arrogant POS.
I went to a talk once about the friendship between C. S. Lewis and Tolkien. What struck me was that Tolkien found Lewis’ writing simplistic and didn’t see the need to write works to reach a wider audience. Lewis wanted to spread imagination and joy to as wide a swathe of people as possible, so he made his prose simple. Both of these are great authors, however they had different goals in writing. Tolkien valued precision and wanted to make his world as detailed as he could. Lewis valued accessibility and wanted to make his worlds easy to understand and relate to. It’s wonderful that we have different types of authors writing for different purposes and audiences. I also argue that writing simply is not a sign of bad writing, but a skill.
Let me summarize the article. "I don't like Brandon Sanderson" "I don't understand religion" "Let's write an article about somebody I don't know but still dislike and something I don't understand". There you go. Modern journalism at it's finest.
One thing that really grinds about people that shit on "bad writing" is that so often they're talking about accessible writing. It's so ableist and classist. I have some visual processing issues much like dyslexia and sometimes after a long stressful day more complex writing either drains me or just doesn't land. I can pick up a Brandon Sanderson any time, any place and that I enjoy and even love some of his books doesn't mean I can't like more complex books or be can't be critical. It just means that pop-fantasy like Brandon Sanderson has a different function in my life than a classic or a literary fiction and that's okay. And the stupid thing is they could avoid all this by using a less stigmatising word than bad. They could use simple, direct, uncomplicated and I wouldn't mind at all because it's true. Also bad is subjective. I find writing that is more about what the words are than what the words say (aka most purple prose) way worse but that often that gets touted as good writing. Just because something is "complex" or "intellectual" doesn't mean it's good, sincerely an execution snob.
I think simple writing does not mean low quality writing at all. I do think Brandon's writing is not only simple, but it's not super good. That's not necessarily a problem though.. He has fantastic ideas and puts out epic stories in no time at all. Good writing would elevate his work further but his stories come across fine without it, too.
Yea I often find that people’s biggest criticism of some of my favorite books is that the writing is simple and not subtle. I think that is the reason why I particularly enjoy those books. I have a very short attention span, and also subtilty is very often lost on me. I like it when authors state stuff directly or when they hammer in their points, because I would never get what they’re trying to say otherwise
I agree with all of this. I read for stories and plots. Purple prose that tell me nothing are a waste of my time and brain energy. I could also argue that works that are all about the writing and not the story are just shallow fluff. Just because words are flowery doesn’t mean they are saying anything.
I feel you. I dropped Malazan because it's too dense. Sanderson is still work for me but it's one of the styles that never fail to keep my focus. And with the younger generations using less and less complex language, going for accessibility may be even crucial. BTW I can't recall anybody calling G. R. R. Martin a bad writer and I didn't even make it through one page - the stuff was so bad (in my eyes). But then not everyone wants an intellectual challenge and I'm sure the books had other aspects of good reads. On the other hand how masterfully simplistic and accessible is Paulo Coelho's writing style. It's like modernism in art, an art in itself. There simply isn't one good writing style.
One of my biggest pet peeves in non-fiction writing (which, for some reason, became a standard for many non-fiction books in the last decade or so) is when the author writes about someone or something but mostly writes about themselves. This journalist is a perfect example. Why do I have to spend my time reading five paragraphs about how the journalist feels about his food, clothing, the drive, etc., in detail? It's not your diary. But when it comes to the real subject, it's stereotypical and shallow?
Resist the urge to give the writer the attention they want. Even anger furthers their cruel, cynical cause. The best punishment for jerks is apathy. Have a great day, stranger-friends
Brandon Sanderson shows himself to be gracious and humble as he truly is. And Jason Kehe, after having been generously graced with Sanderson's most valuable resource-his time-not to mention having been shown a great time sparing no expense, has the audacity to publicly call Brandon "lame" and a bad writer and not professorly and a whole slew of other insulting things. It's a bad look for this guy. Petty and condescending... what a shame.
Not the dumbest part of this article, but that "graduating to Tolkien" line is even more ridiculous because I read LotR when I was in Middle School after reading Harry Potter and wanting more fantasy, and I don't think that is a unique experience. It seems pretty normal in my eyes for people interested in reading fantasy to BEGIN with Tolkien because of how ubiquitous his name is with "fantasy" in general.
I read LotR the first time when I was 9. Silmarilion at 11. Hobbit was actually meant for kids, some other tales too. This guy doesn't know the first thing about Tolkien. Against Sanderson and many other modern fantasy writers Tolkien feels simplistic and orderly.
I haven't even read Brandon Sanderson and even I can see this is so SO rude. He was talking about how Brandon doesn't get enough publications and yet he just tried to destroy him. I feel bad for his family too. They let this person into their home and lives only for them to get trashed on and shamed. It's really disgusting. I absolutely loved your commentary and how unbiased it was!
The first sentence in The way of Kings (the current story, not the prologues, the one who talks about someone dressed in white) is one of the best I've ever read. He has good moments with his prose and neutral moments. The prose never gets in the way of the story, and that's ok.
Tolkien, a devout Roman Catholic, described storytelling as sub-creation and compared it to an imitation of God and a form of worship. Writing, and an interest in Fantasy (or Fairy Stories) is not unique to Latter-day Saints, nor to Christians in general. There are plenty of people who love “world building” and “characters” who are not religious. Sanderson did respond to this article very kindly and asked people not to attack the author. Say what you want about Sanderson’s faith, but his response was very Christian: Love your enemies, bless them that persecute you.
He wrote an article about a hard-working family man and was annoyed that his life was “lame.” You don’t become this successful by partying your time away. You don’t have a happy marriage by partying with other women…like what was this man expecting? Writers write and family men spend time with their family…his life is obviously going to be tame. It’s also a happy life, despite not being “exciting.”
Well, to be fair, leftists jump to that conclusion all the time. As he writes for Wired, one of the more leftist rags on the technology side, it's probably a familiar tack for him. The guy even lives in San Francisco for crying out loud.
I’m currently reading Dune. Certainly not graceful prose in this book. And yet it has enraptured audiences for over 55 years, has conventions to this day (35+ years after Herbert’s passing), and boasts a rabid fanbase that shows no signs of shrinking. All because the world Frank Herbert created lit their imaginations on fire in spite of the flawed prose. Writing, especially in spec fic, is so much more than the aesthetics of the prose. The fact that the author is so hung up on that, ironically, makes him come across as a lot more superficial than he would care to think.
I don't actually know much about Sanderson, but I saw people talking about this on twt and I genuinely got upset. I think it was also partially because being a part of another fandom (BTS ARMY) that gets bad rep because of some ridiculous people and then dismissed over actual issues because of it, this story brought back some memories. In fact, I will probably go and read one of Sanderson's books. And one thing that will definitely stick with me about Sanderson himself is that he seems like a great guy and that the writer of the article is an absolute loser, no matter what either of them are wearing.
You can have all the words in the world and have nothing to say. Sanderson can get you emotionally invested in people and places in a few short pages and that's rare.
I deeply appreciate this critique! I read the article myself, and as someone who is an avid fantasy fan, and who also happens to live in Utah and was raised as a devout Mormon, this article was really annoying 😂 The implications he made about fantasy fans and about Mormons were very unoriginal and overused. I also have to point out that he’s reenforcing the stereotypes that Utahns have about Californians, that they’re politically driven jerks and love to bash religion. Obviously this is a just a stereotype, but he’s one of the reasons the stereotype exists.
I know being generous to the guy is ironic but I think the point is supposed to be that the work is rather puritanical and self-righteous for typically modern mainstream appeal, in an ostensibly adult market, where Game of Thrones thrives. I think we can acknowledge that more people have had sex than have saved lives, and as a father himself, its inner-workings can't possibly be a secret to Sanderson. The spirit of this critique is in RedLetterMedias famed Star Wars prequel takedowns where Plinkett insists that, in a galaxy far, far away, perhaps the most alien thing about it is our heroes are weird sexless monks But yes it is very funny that it comes off like the author believes that sex is more important than rescuing people.
@@futurestoryteller Yes, I see what you mean. I don't think not writing sex makes a story much less relatable per se, though. I find it funny how "his stories are so clean" is always used as a criticism. I don't find it to be a bad thing myself.
@@mikanchan322 Among other things I imagine it's possible that because his magic systems are so "logical", yet the rest of the story lacks a certain amount of seediness and grit, some readers are put off by selective "realism." There's also the point again that he writes adult fantasy, but with no naughty words, and _no naughty stuff,_ I think if he were not Mormon a lot of people would assume his unspoiled style *had* to be a cynical marketing ploy to give the work "broader appeal" especially to investors of future film and television based adaptations, who want to wrangle kids and their spending cash in. I can see both sides of this pretty easy. One of my favorite shows is Avatar: The Last Airbender, which is not missing anything by being "more adult" except you can't deny this is a dimension that those of us in the real world are familiar with, probably long before we are adults, in most cases. Its absence from something that doesn't have a marketing or demographic hang-up certainly strains relatability when there's more swearing and sexuality in the Karate Kid spin-off show. Doesn't seem to prevent him from writing good stories, just might be harder for some people to take them seriously or think of them as fully mature. It's kind of like when a rock band gets labeled "pop music" it may or may not be an insult, just depends on what the artists are comfortable with, but it is also out of their hands, a little bit.
Oml I look up his name and one of the first things is the article. I feel so bad for him and I appreciate the book community is swooping in to support him. I'm personally not a Brandon Sanderson fan, but I will rally behind that man for his passion for books and writing and personality. ❤🌹
What cracks me up is he answers his question right off the bat. Authors don't get famous until they're adapted to the screen. Anderson being famous for *Wheel of Time* is like Timothy Zahn becoming a household name for writing *Heir to the Empire.*
Wow. My partner and I just watched this together, and even though he’s never even read a Sanderson book, he literally left the room because he was getting so ticked off. Also, the thing about being LDS influencing his work… like, duh? He’s LDS. Warbreaker reads like an allegory of the typical 2-year mission that most Mormon men (and many women) go on. That doesn’t mean he’s preaching or pushing his faith on anyone. He writes what he knows. You know… like a writer. Ugh, this article is such garbage 🙄🙄🙄
I also find it ironic given how many other author’s are inspired by their faith. It seems to mostly be an issue when it’s a religion that’s outside the “normal” kinds of religious beliefs
People be f**king in Sandersons books it just fades to black, I'll be honest I'm happy he does some authors can't write sex scenes and it hurts believability of their relationships.
Hard agree. I mean, the dude took 5 months to publish one poorly written article about one of the most successful and prolific authors of our time. I 100% think he’s jealous and I almost wonder if he thought it was some secret that Brandon’s Mormon so he’s like, “haha! This will get him! No one could possibly like him once I expose him and his faith!” …wait, are we witnessing a villain origin story? 😂
At one point I think he claims to have read 17 Sanderson books. Typically if you read that many it's because you like the guy and what he creates. But he spends a ton of time crapping on how poorly he writes.
Hey Elliot I really appreciate skilled readers such as yourself taking a critical eye to what may unfortunately be ragebait. Especially asking asking for quotes, querying if a line that looks like quote was actually said.
This writer really has a problem with nerds. Conventions aren't that different from music festivals. Very enthusiastic and friendly. If he has a problem with that, he's the problem. Gatekeeper!
This was an assignment from an editor. Of course it would "make it past" the editor. The author probably had to make it worse than he wanted to _because_ of the editor.
I have read most of the article - I'm sorry, I just had to skim some parts. I found the author's "voice" rude and we never got a full answer to the question "Why Sanderson? " . Those are my opinions about the article as a piece of writing. As something that I would read because I saw Sanderson's name and was interested in reading it, I felt insulted about the way he talked about geeks, Sanderson fans, Mormons (even if I'm not one myself) and several other "categories" he has created. I was thinking of email the site, but I think that for them, even bad publicity, is good publicity.
I know what you mean. I almost didn’t want to mention this since I didn’t want to give this more attention, but I also hate the idea of other journalists presenting themselves in good faith to authors only to write about them, their fans, their faith, and their families in bad faith.
The whole article seems to boil down to " I don't like Sanderson personally, why is he successful and I'm not. Also, he's Mormon, and I don't like that, so I'm reaching to somehow connect his religion as to why he doesn't deserve a fandom. Cause mormons bad" look, I'm not even a Sanderson fan. I haven't read any of his books despite peer pressure. It's in my backlog of books. This writer is giving jealous snob vibes big time.
I’m just surprised that no one in the Wired office had ever heard of Brandon Sanderson. I guess they have something against hiring nerds in that office
I was at the convention, it was an amazing time and I made a ton of new friends. Sanderson really helped me get back into reading and writing. I'm glad to be apart of your community Elliot! :)
I've read some of Sandersons books, they are definitely very interesting stories and unique. I, personally, don't love them but I can appreciate them and I do respect him as a writer. His lectures on writing are brilliant, the man absolutely knows what makes a successful story and he's proof of it. He is a very nice guy and this journalist seems to have used this opportunity to just trash him, his family, his religion and made it personal for no reason. I don't like Dune but I can appreciate and understand why it is such a huge and successful book in its genre. Journalist just seems like a crapbag.
Oddly enough, I believe that a writer that lacks a good prose, but keeps topping the best selling charts year after year, must mean that the content of what is being published is incredible since we as fans t up with subpar prose just to get a glimpse of the universes he has created.
This guy wasn't just a jerk to Sanderson and his readers, but to all Mormons. It's not ok to judge people based on their sexuality, so judging people based on their religion shouldn't be ok either. 😠😤
Imagine if the author were to write a hit piece, attacking someone because they were Jewish or Muslim. He would be fired immediately, but Mormons are easy targets. It's OK to attack and denigrate Mormons.
Wired also published a really biased hate piece on Hogwarts Legacy posing as an impartial review when the game came out. I'm making a conscious effort to avoid their articles, it's just clickbait rubbish.
I've personally never read a Sanderson book but this article just comes off as someone making fun of Sanderson as a person as well as his fans and his religion. It really just leaves a bad taste in my mouth and makes me want to read one of his books.
It seems unbelievable to me that this person could receive hospitality in Sanderson’s own home, meet and spend time with his family and friends, including going to a theme park and restaurants, yet seemingly not feel a pang of guilt when writing this ‘article’. How spiteful and desperate for attention do you need to be to do something like that? I could never, and even if I did, it would eat away at me day and night. Although, I think the most baffling part is that they mention they’ve read around 17 of his books yet point out that’s he’s, in their opinion, a bad writer. 17 books???? Seriously?? Surely, after 3 or 4 (maybe even less) you realise that the author isn’t for you and it’s time to move on? Make it make sense!
I’m glad you talked about this, because I can imagine some of the less chill people who like Sanderson or fantasy in general going nuts and screaming at this author for being so rude to Sanderson after he showed him so much wonderful hospitality. Not the mention the number of Mormons he must have angered by making fun of their religion. I cannot believe the people at Wired let this article be published, and didn’t just fire this author on the spot for saying the crap he did about Sanderson’s religion.
We're used to it. And I believe it wasn't just the author... I think they asked him to do it and he obliged. The best response is either no response or how Brandon actually responded to it on reddit.
You're absolutely right about this person trying to gain a reaction so they can say, "See! These nerds be crazy 🤪 " And I think they'll be successful, unfortunately.
We can hope that nearly everyone sees the article for the nasty clickbait it is. If I go to read it, I will use the wayback machine and ignore the website just as a way to snub them in this respect.
I fail to understand why being Mormon has anything to do with this. Sanderson doesn't really bring his religion into his writing. To me, this is pure bigotry. Let's talk about his writing and amazing story telling. This was a hit piece. I have read a lot of Brandon's books and I feel his writing and story telling have done nothing but get better.
The hilarity that *this* author would criticize Sanderson's prose for being redundant when he himself has lines like "The good ones, and most of them are good, are very good. Inspiringly good."
If I'm not mistaken he has written similar "hit" pieces before, which seems to be the way of his writing, enrages fan bases and generates clicks on his articles. Basically rage clickbait to generate $.
I really enjoyed you tearing this guy to pieces and it's nice to see that other people have read more obscure series I like, like the books with The Gray Wolf Throne
I just want to thank you for being sincere about this. TH-cam has been recommending to me videos of people who haven't even read Brandon Sanderson and don't know that much about him trying to weaponize this into a political issue to score some kind of rhetorical culture war win
I would like to see the writer write an article about the romance fans. I can just imagine what he would say. What does the guy have with people enjoying themselves? I'm not a big fantasy reader but if a friend asked me to go with him/her to a fantasy book convention I would have no problem as it's the experience of the journey together making new memories that would make it worth it.
Brandons writing has made me cry (in a good way, even when my heart is breaking) more then any other author, period. He's a great writer. Wired should probably fire this guy.
This guy should fire Wired. It was probably an assignment and he had to write it like that to please the editors because they're so upset that he can do what he's done. They will never have a bestselling novel. They will never have a record-breaking crowd-funded project. And that makes them upset. This is the way they express that. Still, they have no idea what they've done to themselves. I expect a lot of people that liked and read Wired are going to drop it over this kind of idiocy.
I remember reading this article and after the first few sentences... I was just reading on, waiting for the point where the journalist would explain he is in fact not just trashing on another human being and actually has a reason. Or a point to make. It never happened, and at the end I was just confused. :') I think Sanderson had it right in his statement/comment that the journalist was probably trying really hard to find that story he wanted to write about and it just wasn't there. But the deadline for the article still was.
It's kind of amazing that Wired published this article. It really does sound personal and a hit piece. I'm not a fan of Mormanism or religion at all, but iunno, man. I don't feel oppressed or anything reading his stuff. I don't follow the guy or watch his lectures or anything. but if you go to his convention...that's kinda like going to disney world and then getting upset that they keep thrusting mickey paraphernalia in your face. duh.
I am a warehouse worker, but I have a story inside me to tell. Iam not a professional writer, iam not a graduate, iam just another Joe that works in a factory. So, what this guy is saying is that no matter what kind of story it is, good or bad, it should remain untold inside of me. What good does this kind of opinion bring to the world? Sanderson is a master story teller, but even going beyond that... Any story should be told, then whoever reads it may be allowed to judge it. And even regardless of that judgment, if you have a story to tell, tell it.
Brandon IS a good writer. He tells amazing stories that keep us engaged and bring so many emotions to the reader. It's his prose that are simple and not complex, but he has said many times that that is on purpose so he can get all the stories out of his head to his fans as fast as possible. He now has published Tress of the Emerald Sea which shows that he's perfectly capable of writing beautiful prose. Still calling him a bad writer is just ridiculous. Sure, it's totally fine to not enjoy his works, just like I don't enjoy Robin Hobb's, but that doesn't mean they're bad writers!
I don’t know much about Sanderson and have never read any of his books. But i thought the opening to the article is genuinely hilarious. It’s basically the writer admitting that he is bad at his job. He’s upset with Sanderson because he didn’t give him any quotable lines. It is literally your job as a writer and particularly a critic to ask questions that lead to quotable lines. If you don’t get those kinds of answers it is YOUR fault. The rest of the article is just bemoaning the fact that the writer is not good at his job and appears to be super aware of it
I get it, the author of the article hates Mormons. He hates Brandon, because he's Mormon. He hates Utah, because Mormons live there. Their food is bad, they are weird, and they have body odor. Brandon's family is weird, because they are all Mormons. The author went on and on and on about all the ways he hated Mormons. Now imagine if the author were to write a hit piece, attacking someone because they were Jewish or Muslim. He would be fired immediately, but Mormons are easy targets. It's OK to attack and denigrate Mormons.
What makes this so extra weird is that this is in *Wired*. A magazine that *used* to be for geeks. Apparently it's now for the mean girls demographic? What a bore.
I'm glad I just read Sanderson's books cause i like his stories and world building. Never really paid attention to the sentence structures(or lack thereof) i guess... keep up what you're doing!
Weird that he throws shade at Orson Scott Card for supposedly being a weirdo but gives Margaret Atwood a pass - distinctly the biggest weirdo of all the authors he lists.
I think this guy's mom would be ashamed of him for what he did. This is one of the ultimate "I raised you to be better than this" moments. And Sanderson STILL kept it classy in the response. That's the kind of graceful attitude this "journalist" doesn't deserve.
The frustration for me is in the author revealing what he did about Sanderson’s private medical condition[s]. In the article, Sanderson is shown repeatedly to be deeply uncomfortable with it, even asking if the author needs to write about it. Author *says* he does, but nothing ever comes of it. It was entirely unnecessary. So what’s the point of revealing something irrelevant to the article, related to medical conditions, that the person you’re writing about is obviously, explicitly uncomfortable with sharing?
How is it that this guy doesn't realize that numerous writers "joke" about being the gods of their own worlds? And even about how their books make them immortal. That's part of the appeal of writing fiction. The fact that he makes it out to be this big revelation shows that he either doesn't know a thing about speculative fiction authors or he's purposefully twisting things to fit a narrative he had already created before even meeting Sanderson. My guess, from the context of the entire article, is the latter.
Any publicity is good (sometimes). After years of admiration, I’ve just made purchases of many of his books. I hate it when journalists try to write hit pieces on creatives.
Sanderson’s response: www.reddit.com/r/brandonsanderson/comments/1200dzk/on_the_wired_article/
Oops, didn't see that you had seen it. Isn't he amazing? Such a humble and perfect answer to the article.
He is much classier than me 😂
Got to respect Sanderson for taking the high road. Seriously, Sanderson is 100% right, we should NOT attack the writer of this article and should shame anyone that does. It's easy to disagree with article's content, but they are free to think and publish their view no matter how nonsensical it may appear to any reader of the article. Commentary, like this video, is exactly the right way to discuss this article.
Sanderson is a nice man, nicer than I would have been in that situation. Also, not everyone from SF, CA acts like this unbelievable d o u c h e who wrote that article. From the tone, he's probably one of those insufferable Cow Hollow d * c k s. 😒
Sanderson is doing exactly what a christian should do... take the high road because that's where you live.
I'm sure Brandon was tempted to bite back, but he fought that off, and has demonstrated mercy in the face of injustice and malice.
The irony of it all is that the author himself comes off as a Mean Girl trope character from a romance novel written by a highschooler.
🤣🤣🤣
The best comment!
That's exactly what I was thinking. He just comes off like such a bitter loser.
Right?
😂😂😂 when the author states Sanderson can't write, but the article itself is so poorly written
It actually sounds like the person who wrote that article was looked after really well by Sanderson & his family. Brought to his home, a convention, a theme park... staying in the car talking about different things... etc etc... What gets me the most is the idea that Sanderson was super kind to this person, and they trashed him and all of his fans for a few cheap clicks
I’d be fine with the article if it truly was only trashing Sanderson’s books, if that’s really what the individual felt. But I completely agree that it feels as though the writer was treated very kindly, and then he went out of his way to be rude and condescending for no reason
@@ebnovels Exactly! Sanderson's reply is so genuine and kind as well. I haven't read any of his books yet, so I'm not even a fan, and yet I can see that the article is rude and that Sanderson seems to be a genuine person who didn't deserve that. His family and friends definitely didn't deserve it either.
Why the Wired guy claims he almost cried when Sanderson's son salts his food is just beyond me. What does that have to do with Sanderson's ability as an author. The guy needs help. A lot of it. And he should never be a journalist/writer.
@@ebnovels dude even went after the Chinese restaurant they went to! like WTF no one was spared.
Yes! It's just...gross. it's a crappy thing to do.
I always assumed that one of the reasons publications don't write about Sanderson very much is that they don't need to... Sanderson is very active with updates, the State of Sanderson, his TH-cam videos, podcasts, lessons as an instructor/professor, updates on Reddit, etc. You don't need to dig very much to find out everything you could want to know about Sanderson, his process, his goals, his progress, what's coming next, etc. He puts it all out there. He's one of if not the most forthcoming open and honest authors out there.
That is very much a good point
This kind of makes it sound like the media should act as his publicist, I think the question was why there's never been a personal profile of him, and while that could be answered by his videos and lectures, I think if the answer truly is he's not a very interesting guy, good for him. The less interesting your life is the better you're probably doing
@@futurestoryteller I don't think the media should act as his publicist and I also don't think it's accurate to say there has never been a personal profile of him. He has a Wikipedia page, a subreddit, a TH-cam channel, his own personal website, a blog he updates, etc. He has a whole team of people that work for him. He has multiple publishers he works with. There are countless videos on TH-cam about him and his books including in depth video essays. One of the arguments made by the writer of that article was that "no major publication" had written about Sanderson when he appears on Yahoo news, Google news, TH-cam news channels as well as non news channels, etc. Magazines in print and online are not as popular as they once were and certainly aren't the way most people consume their media and I think it's a little disingenuous of this writer to be like, "well he's not well known in the circle I run in so I'm going to disregard ALL of the fans I met at a con dedicated specifically to Sanderson, his books, his world, and his fanbase and assume that he's not popular in my specific circles because he's not a good writer." He literally noted the fact that (according to him) no one he worked with at Wired knew who Sanderson was as though that proved his claim that he must not be a good writer. There are countless people on the internet talking about Sanderson and his works DAILY just because they are not the high brow publications this writer referred to doesn't mean they are not important or valid. I think the fact that he had the most successful kick-started ever without having been published in any "major publication" shows that maybe that's not necessary to be successful.
@@tabitash6394 This is quite the rant, apologies for going even longer, I was trying to figure out how to respond to this because I can't quite tell if you're under some misconception about the degree to which I find any exception to what you're saying overall, but I think for the sake of good faith attempts at critical examination we should interrogate all sides to see where the holes are, and in this case I think it's whether or not you're really willing to see the point here. A Wikipedia page, subreddit, TH-cam channel, personal website, or blog are not remotely profiles. Some of them are neutral, which profiles generally aren't. A profile is a human interest story, which is by default emotionally engaged with by both the writer and their reading audience. It is not "objective." So a Wikipedia page, ostensibly a listed accounting of cold hard facts, or scattered fan discussions of multiple (mostly positive) opinions on Reddit would not qualify. But while they aren't objective, they generally aren't - by default - written by an insider to the observed. Sanderson himself is in full control of about 80%-90% of the content you mentioned.
If a person was quite a notable historical figure, as far as their personal accomplishments were concerned, and you recognized the oddity that no one, in the public sphere - as far as you could tell - had ever written a biography about them; if when confronted with the knowledge that they *had* written a book about _themselves,_ rational and thoughtful consideration would not logically bring you to conclude that the issue had been resolved. Especially if that book were about their favorite recipes for making french toast.
There are some problems with the bad faith assumptions being made here, and full disclosure, I fully concede that the author of the article is not being fair.
The observation that Sanderson having the most successful kickstarter in history proves that "maybe" you don't need a public profile to be successful, assumes by inference that the goal of the profile is to affect the trajectory of his career in some way... which it isn't. That might be the private wish of the person who writes one, but it is not the purpose of their existence.
Now I understand the desire to paint the celebrity icons we identify with as fans, with a broad brush as "just like us" but - as I'm surprised to have to point out anyone - if asking why a "major publication" hasn't done a profile on Sanderson, only to write one about how "lame" he is seems "elitist" it's worth pointing out that Sanderson is the elite. That's *why* there was an idea to write an article about him. He's a wildly popular, extremely prolific, traditionally published multi-millionaire author. I'm surprised how much weight Kickstarter has in distorting this reality. Just because he went through independent channels for personal reasons one time (and succeeded - despite his success imagine that!) does not make him some scrappy underdog getting dogged down by "the man" here, and the fact that this article is even a little bit taken that way despite no one knowing this author's name and, the self-fulfilling prophecy of Sanderson Kickstarter goals demonstrates the overwhelming power of fandom preconception over objective thinking, and the benefits of being largely insulated from the public eye.
When I say it sounds like you believe the media should act as his personal publicists, I say that because that's how it _sounds_ but that's not undone in any way by the resources you say act as appropriate substitutes for a Sanderson profile, or by your apparent assumptions about what a profile does, or what it "should be," such as to inform ignorant readers about his successes, or offer insights into why he is successful, or why so many people like his work etc.
I sympathize; it's nuanced, of course the author of the Wired piece himself said he would like to understand Sanderson's success - it _can_ be any of those things, but it doesn't need to be any of them. He talks about that as just one of many avenues he feels he frustrated in trying to write a piece about Sanderson, that he personally thinks, makes for an interesting read.
Here's what happened: some time back Sanderson started his ascension in the world of publishing, building through his proliferation a formidable fanbase with success after success that made him into a wealthy man who is also popular enough to politely request millions of dollars from as many strangers. This Wired writer just learned about about this and for the sake of his profession, wonders if there is untapped potential here to do a profile on Sanderson. Satisfied with his conclusion that this might as well be an editorial first, he asks his colleagues if they know anything about the guy, and when they don't, despite his own precenceptions he embarks on a journey to find anything interesting about Sanderson from his perspective, because after all... he's clearly a big name somehow, he's a best-selling author, there must be SOMETHING interesting about him. Then he decided there wasn't, but he needed to justify the expense, or he wasted all that time for nothing. That's it. That's pretty much all that happened.
This is not to suggest that what the author did was okay, by all acounts that article was lazily-written, mean spirited, spiteful, petty and inane. But the only thing he really *has* to do in a profile is offer his personal opinions about the subject, and his personal opinion happened to be all of those things.
Like Terry Pratchett said 'stories of imagination tend to upset those without one'
Brandon: starts his own charity, loves his family, fans and work, does nothing wrong, defends his enemies
Article guy: this guy stinks
While also stating the above points.
Hahahah
I'm surprised no one's made a joke yet about the author of the article just spending too much time in that Reddit thread that hates Sanderson's guts.
I’m 100% an atheist.
The dude was clouded by his anti-mormon slant where that’s the only angle he was willing to approach their interactions
Which is why he had difficulty saying literally anything else
I don’t like religion. I can tolerate it. But geez… I hate bigotry like that article. I guess it’s super obvious when thrown against someone like Sanderson who actually tries to be nice lol
But yeah. The author wanted sanderson to be his focal point through which he can criticise Mormonism
He acted grossly, and criticised nothing. The most he did was condemnation by association
That’s weak
@@MAORIguy25 Atheism always ends up in intolerance, always has.
Gosh. This journalist revealed much more about himself than he did about Sanderson. I think Sanderson's reputation will survive and most people will see this article for what it is. Thanks for pointing this out to us Elle.
This was exactly my thought. He showed so much of his own character through the article, you wonder if he even got a degree in journalism. Honestly, I think it's just a rage-bait article designed to farm clicks and interaction to boost their presence online, but it hurts their reputation more than Brandon's by far.
@@WolfShadowmancerUnfortunately that’s most “journalism” now… entertainment/sensationalism instead of reporting.
@@WolfShadowmancer At this point I'm surprised whenever a journalist ISN'T like this.
That's usually the case with opinion pieces - whatever they're trying to talk about is always secondary to what they say about themselves in the process.
Yes, the author is desperately trying to show some sort of superiority, this typically happens to those with the lowest self esteem trying to overcompensate. And being next to Sanderson made him feel really small.
The worst part of this article is when this guy goes after his family. It’s just mean spirited.
As if he knows all about his family? The conceit is thick in this one.
That’s how most of these modern “journalists” act. They’re vindictive and cruel.
This has to be the most dehumanizing article I've ever read. As someone who struggles with self esteem, I don't know what I'd do if someone just tore me down again and again with no filter. I hope Sanderson is okay. He's too genuine a person to deserve this.
I can’t imagine happily and passionately talking about my profession to someone who seems to want to know about it, only to have them mock me-and my fans-repeatedly
@@ebnovels No need to worry. As members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints we're used to being treated with this kind of disdain. It's been a thing throughout the history of the Church and Brandon is in himself pretty resilient. I'm sure he's fine.
The fact that Sanderson invited the person to his home, welcomed him to dinner, introduced him to sandersons family, and he has the gall to outright insult him and his faith, trying to diminish his succes as a writer is outrageous
Brandon is an amazing storyteller. That’s why so many people adore him. Not every author needs to write literary poetry to be considered worthy 🙄🙄
Not to mention that many, MANY books are written at an 8th grade reading level...and done so intentionally to be approachable for more people. I definitely get annoyed with certain phrases and repeated words (adroit/adroitly anyone?) But I get annoyed with that in other books too. It's a small thing I can overlook.
The story is what draws me in. And the characters. That's true of nearly any book. Does fantastic prose help? It may be a hook that gets me into a book, but if it continues throughout it? Just icing on top of the story cake!
Especially for wider international non english audience
I actually prefer the writing to be more normal and more easily readable
I just finished reading one of Brandon Sanderson's novels, and I have to say, I'm really impressed with his writing style. Sanderson's choice to focus on storytelling rather than overly literary writing is exactly what makes his books so engaging. Unlike some literary writers who can be distracting with their excessive use of ornate language and convoluted sentence structures, Sanderson's writing is clear and concise, allowing the story to take center stage. It's refreshing to read a book where I'm not constantly being pulled out of the narrative by overly flowery language or self-indulgent literary references. Kudos to Sanderson for putting storytelling first and foremost.
It's a problem I see in academia too. So many authors are obsessed with regurgitating the thesaurus onto the page so that their work sounds "important". My dude, I will respect your research much more if it's explained clearly and concisely.
Yup, it's one of the reasons i like his books, same for Jim Butcher.
I'll use big words, or flowery words in my writing, BUT... the only reason to ever use uncommon words (or _any_ words) is to make your prose as precise and crammed full of meaning as you can make it. It should never be done thinking you're going to wow academia or anyone else with your intellectuality. Impressing the masses with words that sound "intellectual" is something a person that feels inadequate would do, not what an author wanting to tell a story should ever do.
I was enrolled in Sanderson’s class at BYU and I love Sanderson! He is a kind and passionate person who does his best and tries to always help others. He loves his family, his students, and his fans! Idk how anyone could speak so poorly of the guy!
I really want to push back on the idea that Sanderson is bad at writing. The point of writing is to transmit information from the author's head into the reader's. By this metric Sanderson is an amazing writer, I have rarely read action scenes explained in such a clear way. I can clearly picture what is happening at each moment during these scenes and that is something often lost when readers focus on the lack of things like flowery descriptions of buildings or trees.
I think what many people mean when they say "bad at writing" is that they find his prose to be lower quality. I certainly think it is more interested in being functional than pretty. It is about transmitting the information needed in the best way he can. And honestly like you I do enjoy it that way as well. I think it seems poor to many literary types as it is objectively somewhat simple and straightforward. What we like they dislike.
Some writing exists to be pretty and I am sure that has value in itself. It is not my favourite type of writing but different strokes.
I do think his writing is not all that great in the technical sense (especially the dialogue in his earlier work). Good prose doesn't equal flowery, simple prose can be stunning too but Brandon's doesn't really do that either. Hear me out though, I don't think that's a problem? He doesn't HAVE to be amazing at everything, if his ideas and plots are strong then maybe he doesn't need to be an absolute wizard with prose.
What some people want is to read a paragraph, be so in awe at how the syllables were strung together that they sit worshiping the skill of the author for a few minutes while the meaning of the paragraph, if any, completely escapes them. They call this writing and demand that everyone else want this kind of entertainment as well.
If Sanderson is a bad writer than by default we, millions of his readers, have bad taste. Now that's a bald thing to say if you're a mediocre journalist who has never published a book. I guess the guy is simply jealous. BTW to me Sanderson is a good writer. Not every sentence is perfect and not all plots and characters are deep but there's much more to books than technical quality. In fact we all have dropped some good books in school because the were boring. Lawrence Durrell and Marcel Proust are amazingly good writers but the form hijacks the story. And what about other things like the vision, building tension or creating relatable characters or triggering emotional responses? Aren't these at least as important as perfect beautiful prose?
@@aaronhunyady Now let's not diss people who like well crafted prose either - they aren't snobs by default. I bet plenty of people exist who love complicated prose and also like Sanderson's stories!
I completely agree with you. I am mormon and I have been reading his books since I was 12 when I picked up a book from Costco by him and it had a cool cover and my mom would buy books from Costco because they are better priced sometimes for hard backs. It wasn't until college I learned he was mormon. There are loose connections where I can see the inspiration because of his background in the faith but he has never preached nor pushed his books to further religious ideology, even in his podcast is never a focus just an occasional side comment. My biggest issue with the article beside attacking religion was that instead of saying "that's such a unique perspective, tell me more how you see the world and is it because of your faith? " that's an interesting story, I'd read that no matter if he was atheist, Amish, or x, y, z. Because that's an interesting story to understand who he is. Or criticize him and his work which is also valid but to be so mean spirited about his character and lack of drama or gossip.... it leaves a bad taste and feels gross
1. He is an actual professor, re: his clothing
2. Tress of the Emerald Sea is one of the most heartfelt books I've read. He hit the highpoints in terms of "just the feels" there that I have only seen Robin Hobb/some others in the fantasy genre accomplish.
3. Read Tolkien in english(not a native speaker) when I was 11, all of GRRM before 13. Enjoyment is subjective.
4. I didn't know about the "pain" thing. And I wish I didn't learn about it this way.
5. I didn't even know he was Mormon before this, and I've read almost every book of his bar some short stories, and watched his lectures on TH-cam, and also some of his other uploads(no podcasts). He's not "very Mormon".
He _is_ very "mormon." Just not what the average person that dislikes the Church would think of when considering that. Other than that I think I agree with you. Pushing your beliefs on others isn't something he would do. He's content to just be an example of what he believes. So should the rest of us (be content with just being an example of what we believe). Our words and actions are far better teaching tools than _any_ kind of "hardcore preaching." This is the reason so many people hate religion... most of the people with strong beliefs want to push them on others with no regard to how they themselves are putting into action the very principles they try to push on others. That is just folly and foolishness in action.
As the idiom goes, "Actions speak louder than words."
In regards to the professorial clothing discussion, it feels like Sanderson made a lighthearted self-deprecating joke to break the ice and this journalist decided to use it as an opportunity to take an unnecessary jab at what he wears and try to imply he's some kind of egomaniac. Which is just so disingenuous!
This piece was clearly written in bad faith, inexcusable for a journalist, putting all that aside though. What I simply cannot get over is the fact that this guy went to a man's HOUSE, met his wife, his son, ate his food etc etc etc and then still has the gall to write a piece such as this. Well, it tells me all I need to know about the person who wrote this article.
Didn't he say he ate bad takeout or something?
Sanderson wrote a response to this and said explicitly that this is what he found most hurtful. Apparently this guy went out of his way to act like Sanderson's friend.
I think the worst part was when he basically dragged a guy that was very likely in recovery. I couldn't shake the feeling the author was looking down his nose at a guy who found inspiration to change his life after reading WOK, and decided to name his kid after a character that likely gave him strength. What an arrogant POS.
I went to a talk once about the friendship between C. S. Lewis and Tolkien. What struck me was that Tolkien found Lewis’ writing simplistic and didn’t see the need to write works to reach a wider audience. Lewis wanted to spread imagination and joy to as wide a swathe of people as possible, so he made his prose simple. Both of these are great authors, however they had different goals in writing. Tolkien valued precision and wanted to make his world as detailed as he could. Lewis valued accessibility and wanted to make his worlds easy to understand and relate to.
It’s wonderful that we have different types of authors writing for different purposes and audiences. I also argue that writing simply is not a sign of bad writing, but a skill.
Let me summarize the article.
"I don't like Brandon Sanderson"
"I don't understand religion"
"Let's write an article about somebody I don't know but still dislike and something I don't understand".
There you go. Modern journalism at it's finest.
One thing that really grinds about people that shit on "bad writing" is that so often they're talking about accessible writing. It's so ableist and classist. I have some visual processing issues much like dyslexia and sometimes after a long stressful day more complex writing either drains me or just doesn't land. I can pick up a Brandon Sanderson any time, any place and that I enjoy and even love some of his books doesn't mean I can't like more complex books or be can't be critical. It just means that pop-fantasy like Brandon Sanderson has a different function in my life than a classic or a literary fiction and that's okay.
And the stupid thing is they could avoid all this by using a less stigmatising word than bad. They could use simple, direct, uncomplicated and I wouldn't mind at all because it's true.
Also bad is subjective. I find writing that is more about what the words are than what the words say (aka most purple prose) way worse but that often that gets touted as good writing. Just because something is "complex" or "intellectual" doesn't mean it's good, sincerely an execution snob.
YES AND YES TO ALL OF THIS!!! Glass like prose isn't bad. It lacks variety, but it serves its purpose and I wouldn't want it any other way.
I think simple writing does not mean low quality writing at all. I do think Brandon's writing is not only simple, but it's not super good. That's not necessarily a problem though.. He has fantastic ideas and puts out epic stories in no time at all. Good writing would elevate his work further but his stories come across fine without it, too.
Yea I often find that people’s biggest criticism of some of my favorite books is that the writing is simple and not subtle. I think that is the reason why I particularly enjoy those books. I have a very short attention span, and also subtilty is very often lost on me. I like it when authors state stuff directly or when they hammer in their points, because I would never get what they’re trying to say otherwise
I agree with all of this. I read for stories and plots. Purple prose that tell me nothing are a waste of my time and brain energy. I could also argue that works that are all about the writing and not the story are just shallow fluff. Just because words are flowery doesn’t mean they are saying anything.
I feel you. I dropped Malazan because it's too dense. Sanderson is still work for me but it's one of the styles that never fail to keep my focus. And with the younger generations using less and less complex language, going for accessibility may be even crucial. BTW I can't recall anybody calling G. R. R. Martin a bad writer and I didn't even make it through one page - the stuff was so bad (in my eyes). But then not everyone wants an intellectual challenge and I'm sure the books had other aspects of good reads. On the other hand how masterfully simplistic and accessible is Paulo Coelho's writing style. It's like modernism in art, an art in itself. There simply isn't one good writing style.
One of my biggest pet peeves in non-fiction writing (which, for some reason, became a standard for many non-fiction books in the last decade or so) is when the author writes about someone or something but mostly writes about themselves. This journalist is a perfect example. Why do I have to spend my time reading five paragraphs about how the journalist feels about his food, clothing, the drive, etc., in detail? It's not your diary. But when it comes to the real subject, it's stereotypical and shallow?
I had exactly th same impression!
Yeah, when this became a thing?
Honestly this article just made Brandon seem like a nice, nerdy dude. It also made the author seem very petty and mean.
This journalist needed more hugs from his mom.
Articles like this are why people don’t take journalists seriously anymore.
Resist the urge to give the writer the attention they want. Even anger furthers their cruel, cynical cause. The best punishment for jerks is apathy. Have a great day, stranger-friends
Brandon Sanderson shows himself to be gracious and humble as he truly is. And Jason Kehe, after having been generously graced with Sanderson's most valuable resource-his time-not to mention having been shown a great time sparing no expense, has the audacity to publicly call Brandon "lame" and a bad writer and not professorly and a whole slew of other insulting things. It's a bad look for this guy. Petty and condescending... what a shame.
Let's all avoid clicking on the article ourselves because this must be rage bait.
*is most certainly rage bait
Yeah, I have zero intention of ever clicking on this article.
If you look up most of this guy's articles they're rage bait.
Not the dumbest part of this article, but that "graduating to Tolkien" line is even more ridiculous because I read LotR when I was in Middle School after reading Harry Potter and wanting more fantasy, and I don't think that is a unique experience. It seems pretty normal in my eyes for people interested in reading fantasy to BEGIN with Tolkien because of how ubiquitous his name is with "fantasy" in general.
I read LotR the first time when I was 9. Silmarilion at 11. Hobbit was actually meant for kids, some other tales too. This guy doesn't know the first thing about Tolkien. Against Sanderson and many other modern fantasy writers Tolkien feels simplistic and orderly.
I haven't even read Brandon Sanderson and even I can see this is so SO rude. He was talking about how Brandon doesn't get enough publications and yet he just tried to destroy him. I feel bad for his family too. They let this person into their home and lives only for them to get trashed on and shamed. It's really disgusting.
I absolutely loved your commentary and how unbiased it was!
The author is secretly ZANE
😂 great description.
The first sentence in The way of Kings (the current story, not the prologues, the one who talks about someone dressed in white) is one of the best I've ever read. He has good moments with his prose and neutral moments. The prose never gets in the way of the story, and that's ok.
Tolkien, a devout Roman Catholic, described storytelling as sub-creation and compared it to an imitation of God and a form of worship. Writing, and an interest in Fantasy (or Fairy Stories) is not unique to Latter-day Saints, nor to Christians in general. There are plenty of people who love “world building” and “characters” who are not religious.
Sanderson did respond to this article very kindly and asked people not to attack the author. Say what you want about Sanderson’s faith, but his response was very Christian: Love your enemies, bless them that persecute you.
I pray to our lord and savior Brandon Sanderson everynight to my book shrine dedicated to him lol
He wrote an article about a hard-working family man and was annoyed that his life was “lame.” You don’t become this successful by partying your time away. You don’t have a happy marriage by partying with other women…like what was this man expecting? Writers write and family men spend time with their family…his life is obviously going to be tame. It’s also a happy life, despite not being “exciting.”
Everyone mentioned in the article: [acting in understandable and normal ways] The author: Cult???
Well, to be fair, leftists jump to that conclusion all the time. As he writes for Wired, one of the more leftist rags on the technology side, it's probably a familiar tack for him.
The guy even lives in San Francisco for crying out loud.
I’m currently reading Dune. Certainly not graceful prose in this book. And yet it has enraptured audiences for over 55 years, has conventions to this day (35+ years after Herbert’s passing), and boasts a rabid fanbase that shows no signs of shrinking. All because the world Frank Herbert created lit their imaginations on fire in spite of the flawed prose. Writing, especially in spec fic, is so much more than the aesthetics of the prose. The fact that the author is so hung up on that, ironically, makes him come across as a lot more superficial than he would care to think.
I don't actually know much about Sanderson, but I saw people talking about this on twt and I genuinely got upset. I think it was also partially because being a part of another fandom (BTS ARMY) that gets bad rep because of some ridiculous people and then dismissed over actual issues because of it, this story brought back some memories. In fact, I will probably go and read one of Sanderson's books. And one thing that will definitely stick with me about Sanderson himself is that he seems like a great guy and that the writer of the article is an absolute loser, no matter what either of them are wearing.
You can have all the words in the world and have nothing to say. Sanderson can get you emotionally invested in people and places in a few short pages and that's rare.
When are we getting the kickstarter for the Dragonsteel amusement park though?
I deeply appreciate this critique! I read the article myself, and as someone who is an avid fantasy fan, and who also happens to live in Utah and was raised as a devout Mormon, this article was really annoying 😂 The implications he made about fantasy fans and about Mormons were very unoriginal and overused.
I also have to point out that he’s reenforcing the stereotypes that Utahns have about Californians, that they’re politically driven jerks and love to bash religion. Obviously this is a just a stereotype, but he’s one of the reasons the stereotype exists.
"No one has sex. They only save lives" is my favourite quote
did this author even read wax and wayne??
@@earthtoamanda7574 Or Well of Ascension
I know being generous to the guy is ironic but I think the point is supposed to be that the work is rather puritanical and self-righteous for typically modern mainstream appeal, in an ostensibly adult market, where Game of Thrones thrives. I think we can acknowledge that more people have had sex than have saved lives, and as a father himself, its inner-workings can't possibly be a secret to Sanderson.
The spirit of this critique is in RedLetterMedias famed Star Wars prequel takedowns where Plinkett insists that, in a galaxy far, far away, perhaps the most alien thing about it is our heroes are weird sexless monks
But yes it is very funny that it comes off like the author believes that sex is more important than rescuing people.
@@futurestoryteller Yes, I see what you mean. I don't think not writing sex makes a story much less relatable per se, though.
I find it funny how "his stories are so clean" is always used as a criticism. I don't find it to be a bad thing myself.
@@mikanchan322 Among other things I imagine it's possible that because his magic systems are so "logical", yet the rest of the story lacks a certain amount of seediness and grit, some readers are put off by selective "realism." There's also the point again that he writes adult fantasy, but with no naughty words, and _no naughty stuff,_ I think if he were not Mormon a lot of people would assume his unspoiled style *had* to be a cynical marketing ploy to give the work "broader appeal" especially to investors of future film and television based adaptations, who want to wrangle kids and their spending cash in.
I can see both sides of this pretty easy. One of my favorite shows is Avatar: The Last Airbender, which is not missing anything by being "more adult" except you can't deny this is a dimension that those of us in the real world are familiar with, probably long before we are adults, in most cases. Its absence from something that doesn't have a marketing or demographic hang-up certainly strains relatability when there's more swearing and sexuality in the Karate Kid spin-off show.
Doesn't seem to prevent him from writing good stories, just might be harder for some people to take them seriously or think of them as fully mature.
It's kind of like when a rock band gets labeled "pop music" it may or may not be an insult, just depends on what the artists are comfortable with, but it is also out of their hands, a little bit.
Oml I look up his name and one of the first things is the article. I feel so bad for him and I appreciate the book community is swooping in to support him. I'm personally not a Brandon Sanderson fan, but I will rally behind that man for his passion for books and writing and personality. ❤🌹
What cracks me up is he answers his question right off the bat. Authors don't get famous until they're adapted to the screen. Anderson being famous for *Wheel of Time* is like Timothy Zahn becoming a household name for writing *Heir to the Empire.*
Wow. My partner and I just watched this together, and even though he’s never even read a Sanderson book, he literally left the room because he was getting so ticked off.
Also, the thing about being LDS influencing his work… like, duh? He’s LDS. Warbreaker reads like an allegory of the typical 2-year mission that most Mormon men (and many women) go on. That doesn’t mean he’s preaching or pushing his faith on anyone. He writes what he knows. You know… like a writer.
Ugh, this article is such garbage 🙄🙄🙄
I also find it ironic given how many other author’s are inspired by their faith. It seems to mostly be an issue when it’s a religion that’s outside the “normal” kinds of religious beliefs
Oh my goodness, Thank You for saying this
I *am* LDS, I even served a mission, and I didn't pick up anything resembling that sort of theming in Warbreaker, lol
@@Silas_MN 🤷🏻♀️ Just my opinion. I used to be LDS, and I got hints of it when I read it.
Interesting. I mostly just was surprised and delighted by how it took a hard left into detective fiction for a while. It was kind of amazing.
Chips, sodas, apple crisps, and hanging out with fantasy lovers? That sounds like an amazing time to me!
Exactly. When did apple crisps become lame?!
People be f**king in Sandersons books it just fades to black, I'll be honest I'm happy he does some authors can't write sex scenes and it hurts believability of their relationships.
Who the hell even is this guy. 5 minutes in, everything just screams jealousy.
Hard agree. I mean, the dude took 5 months to publish one poorly written article about one of the most successful and prolific authors of our time. I 100% think he’s jealous and I almost wonder if he thought it was some secret that Brandon’s Mormon so he’s like, “haha! This will get him! No one could possibly like him once I expose him and his faith!” …wait, are we witnessing a villain origin story? 😂
At one point I think he claims to have read 17 Sanderson books. Typically if you read that many it's because you like the guy and what he creates. But he spends a ton of time crapping on how poorly he writes.
Hey Elliot I really appreciate skilled readers such as yourself taking a critical eye to what may unfortunately be ragebait. Especially asking asking for quotes, querying if a line that looks like quote was actually said.
This writer really has a problem with nerds. Conventions aren't that different from music festivals. Very enthusiastic and friendly. If he has a problem with that, he's the problem. Gatekeeper!
I wrote a letter to the editor. There was absolutely no excuse for this article to have made it passed any editor to print.
I was curious how this made it past an editor too.
I was curious how this made it past an editor too.
This was an assignment from an editor. Of course it would "make it past" the editor. The author probably had to make it worse than he wanted to _because_ of the editor.
I have read most of the article - I'm sorry, I just had to skim some parts.
I found the author's "voice" rude and we never got a full answer to the question "Why Sanderson? " . Those are my opinions about the article as a piece of writing.
As something that I would read because I saw Sanderson's name and was interested in reading it, I felt insulted about the way he talked about geeks, Sanderson fans, Mormons (even if I'm not one myself) and several other "categories" he has created. I was thinking of email the site, but I think that for them, even bad publicity, is good publicity.
I know what you mean. I almost didn’t want to mention this since I didn’t want to give this more attention, but I also hate the idea of other journalists presenting themselves in good faith to authors only to write about them, their fans, their faith, and their families in bad faith.
The whole article seems to boil down to " I don't like Sanderson personally, why is he successful and I'm not. Also, he's Mormon, and I don't like that, so I'm reaching to somehow connect his religion as to why he doesn't deserve a fandom. Cause mormons bad" look, I'm not even a Sanderson fan. I haven't read any of his books despite peer pressure. It's in my backlog of books. This writer is giving jealous snob vibes big time.
You summed that up well!
I’m just surprised that no one in the Wired office had ever heard of Brandon Sanderson. I guess they have something against hiring nerds in that office
I was at the convention, it was an amazing time and I made a ton of new friends. Sanderson really helped me get back into reading and writing. I'm glad to be apart of your community Elliot! :)
An article of disgrace about one of the most nicest authors in the world
The author would have called Tolkien a bad person/author because Tolkien was Catholic, if he could get away with it.😂
This, absolutely. I'm as militant an atheist as they come, but even I find the attacks on Sanderson's religion incredibly uncalled-for and offensive.
From a LDS man I thank you.
I've read some of Sandersons books, they are definitely very interesting stories and unique. I, personally, don't love them but I can appreciate them and I do respect him as a writer. His lectures on writing are brilliant, the man absolutely knows what makes a successful story and he's proof of it. He is a very nice guy and this journalist seems to have used this opportunity to just trash him, his family, his religion and made it personal for no reason. I don't like Dune but I can appreciate and understand why it is such a huge and successful book in its genre. Journalist just seems like a crapbag.
Oddly enough, I believe that a writer that lacks a good prose, but keeps topping the best selling charts year after year, must mean that the content of what is being published is incredible since we as fans t up with subpar prose just to get a glimpse of the universes he has created.
This guy wasn't just a jerk to Sanderson and his readers, but to all Mormons. It's not ok to judge people based on their sexuality, so judging people based on their religion shouldn't be ok either. 😠😤
Imagine if the author were to write a hit piece, attacking someone because they were Jewish or Muslim. He would be fired immediately, but Mormons are easy targets. It's OK to attack and denigrate Mormons.
Wired also published a really biased hate piece on Hogwarts Legacy posing as an impartial review when the game came out. I'm making a conscious effort to avoid their articles, it's just clickbait rubbish.
Yes. They’ve proved they aren’t a credible publication.
It is sad seeing the legacy media have to stoop to attack pieces to try and get clicks and remain relevant.
I've personally never read a Sanderson book but this article just comes off as someone making fun of Sanderson as a person as well as his fans and his religion. It really just leaves a bad taste in my mouth and makes me want to read one of his books.
I appreciate you take on this, Elliot. And I’m happy you’re feeling better!
It seems unbelievable to me that this person could receive hospitality in Sanderson’s own home, meet and spend time with his family and friends, including going to a theme park and restaurants, yet seemingly not feel a pang of guilt when writing this ‘article’. How spiteful and desperate for attention do you need to be to do something like that? I could never, and even if I did, it would eat away at me day and night.
Although, I think the most baffling part is that they mention they’ve read around 17 of his books yet point out that’s he’s, in their opinion, a bad writer.
17 books???? Seriously??
Surely, after 3 or 4 (maybe even less) you realise that the author isn’t for you and it’s time to move on? Make it make sense!
I’m glad you talked about this, because I can imagine some of the less chill people who like Sanderson or fantasy in general going nuts and screaming at this author for being so rude to Sanderson after he showed him so much wonderful hospitality. Not the mention the number of Mormons he must have angered by making fun of their religion. I cannot believe the people at Wired let this article be published, and didn’t just fire this author on the spot for saying the crap he did about Sanderson’s religion.
We're used to it. And I believe it wasn't just the author... I think they asked him to do it and he obliged. The best response is either no response or how Brandon actually responded to it on reddit.
You're absolutely right about this person trying to gain a reaction so they can say, "See! These nerds be crazy 🤪 " And I think they'll be successful, unfortunately.
Haha, they likely will
We can hope that nearly everyone sees the article for the nasty clickbait it is. If I go to read it, I will use the wayback machine and ignore the website just as a way to snub them in this respect.
I fail to understand why being Mormon has anything to do with this. Sanderson doesn't really bring his religion into his writing. To me, this is pure bigotry. Let's talk about his writing and amazing story telling. This was a hit piece. I have read a lot of Brandon's books and I feel his writing and story telling have done nothing but get better.
The hilarity that *this* author would criticize Sanderson's prose for being redundant when he himself has lines like "The good ones, and most of them are good, are very good. Inspiringly good."
Thanks for reading the article here so we don't need to go to Wired and give them the clicks.
Its funny, your summation of the article at 23:46 is more insightful and accurate than the entirety of the actual article. Well said.
If I'm not mistaken he has written similar "hit" pieces before, which seems to be the way of his writing, enrages fan bases and generates clicks on his articles. Basically rage clickbait to generate $.
I really enjoyed you tearing this guy to pieces and it's nice to see that other people have read more obscure series I like, like the books with The Gray Wolf Throne
The Seven Realms series was one of my favorites in middle school and I desperately want to reread it at some point
Corporate media needs to be abolished. They are a stain on the name of journalism.
I just want to thank you for being sincere about this. TH-cam has been recommending to me videos of people who haven't even read Brandon Sanderson and don't know that much about him trying to weaponize this into a political issue to score some kind of rhetorical culture war win
I would like to see the writer write an article about the romance fans. I can just imagine what he would say.
What does the guy have with people enjoying themselves? I'm not a big fantasy reader but if a friend asked me to go with him/her to a fantasy book convention I would have no problem as it's the experience of the journey together making new memories that would make it worth it.
Brandons writing has made me cry (in a good way, even when my heart is breaking) more then any other author, period. He's a great writer. Wired should probably fire this guy.
This guy should fire Wired. It was probably an assignment and he had to write it like that to please the editors because they're so upset that he can do what he's done. They will never have a bestselling novel. They will never have a record-breaking crowd-funded project. And that makes them upset. This is the way they express that. Still, they have no idea what they've done to themselves. I expect a lot of people that liked and read Wired are going to drop it over this kind of idiocy.
I remember reading this article and after the first few sentences... I was just reading on, waiting for the point where the journalist would explain he is in fact not just trashing on another human being and actually has a reason. Or a point to make. It never happened, and at the end I was just confused. :')
I think Sanderson had it right in his statement/comment that the journalist was probably trying really hard to find that story he wanted to write about and it just wasn't there. But the deadline for the article still was.
It's kind of amazing that Wired published this article. It really does sound personal and a hit piece. I'm not a fan of Mormanism or religion at all, but iunno, man. I don't feel oppressed or anything reading his stuff. I don't follow the guy or watch his lectures or anything. but if you go to his convention...that's kinda like going to disney world and then getting upset that they keep thrusting mickey paraphernalia in your face. duh.
You have done a great critique of this article!
I am a warehouse worker, but I have a story inside me to tell. Iam not a professional writer, iam not a graduate, iam just another Joe that works in a factory. So, what this guy is saying is that no matter what kind of story it is, good or bad, it should remain untold inside of me. What good does this kind of opinion bring to the world? Sanderson is a master story teller, but even going beyond that... Any story should be told, then whoever reads it may be allowed to judge it. And even regardless of that judgment, if you have a story to tell, tell it.
I'll never understand how some people can be so rude! The person that wrote that article... I don't understand them
Brandon IS a good writer. He tells amazing stories that keep us engaged and bring so many emotions to the reader. It's his prose that are simple and not complex, but he has said many times that that is on purpose so he can get all the stories out of his head to his fans as fast as possible. He now has published Tress of the Emerald Sea which shows that he's perfectly capable of writing beautiful prose. Still calling him a bad writer is just ridiculous. Sure, it's totally fine to not enjoy his works, just like I don't enjoy Robin Hobb's, but that doesn't mean they're bad writers!
I don’t know much about Sanderson and have never read any of his books. But i thought the opening to the article is genuinely hilarious. It’s basically the writer admitting that he is bad at his job. He’s upset with Sanderson because he didn’t give him any quotable lines. It is literally your job as a writer and particularly a critic to ask questions that lead to quotable lines. If you don’t get those kinds of answers it is YOUR fault. The rest of the article is just bemoaning the fact that the writer is not good at his job and appears to be super aware of it
I personally love accessible reads with no sex stuff! WHAT OF IT?!?
Thanks for this. Honestly in journalism is in short supply and you called it out.
I can’t wait for my own sparkly bookmark. It’s shipped and on the way with my Tress book. Wooh!
I get it, the author of the article hates Mormons. He hates Brandon, because he's Mormon. He hates Utah, because Mormons live there. Their food is bad, they are weird, and they have body odor. Brandon's family is weird, because they are all Mormons. The author went on and on and on about all the ways he hated Mormons.
Now imagine if the author were to write a hit piece, attacking someone because they were Jewish or Muslim. He would be fired immediately, but Mormons are easy targets. It's OK to attack and denigrate Mormons.
Great video. The article makes me feel angry and sick at the same time, so it's really nice to see people calling it out.
What makes this so extra weird is that this is in *Wired*. A magazine that *used* to be for geeks. Apparently it's now for the mean girls demographic? What a bore.
*grabs coffee.
Go on 👀
I'm glad I just read Sanderson's books cause i like his stories and world building. Never really paid attention to the sentence structures(or lack thereof) i guess... keep up what you're doing!
I really liked and agree with your points, well done.
Weird that he throws shade at Orson Scott Card for supposedly being a weirdo but gives Margaret Atwood a pass - distinctly the biggest weirdo of all the authors he lists.
2:46 That was the opening 😮💨
I think this guy's mom would be ashamed of him for what he did. This is one of the ultimate "I raised you to be better than this" moments.
And Sanderson STILL kept it classy in the response. That's the kind of graceful attitude this "journalist" doesn't deserve.
The frustration for me is in the author revealing what he did about Sanderson’s private medical condition[s]. In the article, Sanderson is shown repeatedly to be deeply uncomfortable with it, even asking if the author needs to write about it. Author *says* he does, but nothing ever comes of it. It was entirely unnecessary. So what’s the point of revealing something irrelevant to the article, related to medical conditions, that the person you’re writing about is obviously, explicitly uncomfortable with sharing?
It seems as though he just wanted to throw everything at the wall in hopes something would stick. I agree that it seemed rather pointless
Did the writer (activist) say he cried in the basement? Question - who let him out of the basement?
How is it that this guy doesn't realize that numerous writers "joke" about being the gods of their own worlds? And even about how their books make them immortal. That's part of the appeal of writing fiction. The fact that he makes it out to be this big revelation shows that he either doesn't know a thing about speculative fiction authors or he's purposefully twisting things to fit a narrative he had already created before even meeting Sanderson. My guess, from the context of the entire article, is the latter.
Any publicity is good (sometimes). After years of admiration, I’ve just made purchases of many of his books. I hate it when journalists try to write hit pieces on creatives.