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 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

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.

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 KZfaq 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 KZfaq 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, KZfaq 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, KZfaq 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.

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.

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.

If you asked me what was wrong with this person....my first guess would be........ALOT. 😆😆

​@@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.

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.

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.

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

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 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!

*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.

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!

I had exactly th same impression!

Yeah, when this became a thing?

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.

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.

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.

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.

😂 great description.

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.

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.

Exactly. When did apple crisps become lame?!

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

You summed that up well!

Yes. They’ve proved they aren’t a credible publication.

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.

The Seven Realms series was one of my favorites in middle school and I desperately want to reread it at some point

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.

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

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.

I’ve heard people make the same comparison when playing the Sims 😂

Yeah, I guess we’ll never know!

I find it interesting that Sanderson is having a big public beef with Amazon, and showing people they can be successful outside of Amazon's parasitic model...and then some guy is sent to write a hack job on him to make him look bad to the general public. Hmm...