BRANDON SANDERSON BOOKS FREE
I'm not a huge fan of his work, though I have a great deal of respect for his enthusiasm, how hard he obviously works, and some of the very cool stuff he's done like pulling back the curtain on the editing process (and offering up a free book) in the Warbreaker project. If you ask any person that knows shit about literature they will tell you that a book is just as good for the things it doesn't say as it is good for the things that it said. I think he underestimates his audience and feels that he needs to write down and say EVERYTHING that he wants to convey. The crew that surrounded Kelsier also felt like an assortment of tropes with the only function of throwing in sassy one-liners and funny stuff, that seemed to be placed there for comedic relief and also an effort to cater to an audience that is used to "funny banter", and his main characters couldn't deliver it. The "Geeky weak kid", reading books on parties, that finally blossoms as a true leader, felt to me that he was preaching to the geek choir and that he was really trying too hard to land the empathy of the typical Fantasy audience with that character. The Boy Prince that the girl meets (sorry I don't remember the names) also was a huge trope.
BRANDON SANDERSON BOOKS FULL
Kelsier is too perfect, I don't think he was given enough flaws for him to be a full fleshed out character and it feels that everything that happened to him up to the point where the novel starts was just put there by the author to create that particular character. I agree with you that he does not subvert stereotypes and tropes as well as he should to provide the reader with some novelty. To me, it kills suspension of disbelief.Ĭharacter building was bland in Mist. Not by them laying out their whole thought processes for us. I don't want to see what the character is feeling and thinking written out for me all the time, I think that's plain BAD WRITING, I think actions and developments should speak for themselves and we should get to know characters like we know people in real life, by what they do and say. I think that the author felt the need to "lay it out for me" in regards to what her conflicts were, he needed to write out the character's train of thought because the actions themselves and the developments of the story were really not enough for the reader to figure it out for themselves and get a feeling of discovery when getting to know a character.
The main character of Mistborn, the girl, to me was dry and predictable. I feel that the characters are purely tropes, sometimes reversed tropes, but that doens't make it enough for me. Regarding storytelling, I don't think the stories he builds are neither unpredictable or satisfying.
It makes the ordeal of magic really dry, I feel like im reading videogame characters and that there is no "occult" or "hidden" stuff in Magic, I don't feel it being really MAGICAL, it's more like physics but different. I'm sure some readers love this, as it gives magical characters those limitations in turn and it feels a little less deus-ex-y if you will.īut it takes away all the mystery.
I don't like Magic systems to be all laid out for me in all of their details, limitations, advantages, disadvantages with such precision and accuracy. I've read Mistborn, the first two books, and I feel that his idea was better suited for a videogame than a novel. I think he is overrated in this community, in r/fantasy and in general.
0 kommentar(er)
