This was so much fun!! I love how you almost put Hobb and GGK just off the chart (which is honestly where they deserve to be, lol). And I am here for the Sanderson defense, his prose is not nearly as bad as so many people make it out to be. Also, I would be so down for a similar type of video but then for character work or something!!
19:55 I love Harry's wildly shifting perspective throughout Battle Ground. "Those spears howled and sent concussive force and fire splashing against my shield-or missing me completely, and hitting the houses across the street."
I agree. Sanderson's prose is simple, but not really good. You could call it average, at best. The best examples of writers with simple but good prose are Orwell, Hitchens and Steinbeck. Sanderson's ideas are good, his world building good, but his writing isn't good. Not bad, by any means, but not good, either. Sanderson is a savvy writer and plays to his strengths, which demonstrably is not his prose.
I've always had enormous difficulty with Tolkien's prose which disappoints me and makes me feel alienated being a fan of the fantasy genre. I did learn English as a second language (I'm from Japan), not the most well-read in English literature, and that might be an ultimate factor in my struggles along with perhaps my profession as a STEM type which has me most used to reading very technical literature above all else. Yet I tried to take some passages from Tolkien and rewrite them to illustrate the difficulties I have with his prose. Given this: >> Soon he had passed, like a shadow into shadow, down the winding road, and behind him still the black ranks crossed the bridge. So great an army had never issued from that vale since the days of Isildur’s might; no host so fell and strong in arms had yet assailed the fords of Anduin; and yet it was but one and not the greatest of the hosts that Mordor now sent forth. ... my brain tends to trip up reading it and I end up having to re-read often. But if I tweak it like this: >> He soon passed, like a shadow into shadow, down the winding road. Behind him, the black ranks crossed the bridge. Such a great army had never been seen from that vale since the days of Isildur’s might; no host so fell and strong in arms had yet assailed the fords of Anduin, and yet it was but one, and not the greatest, that Mordor had sent forth. ... suddenly it's so much easier for me to digest! I suspect even these tweaks may have removed a lot of what Tolkien fans find so beautiful about his prose, but it's so much easier to comprehend now for my ESL brain. Apologies to Tolkien fans for likely butchering much of what make Tolkien's prose so beautiful in the above exercise. Yet even just little things like, "He soon passed" vs. "Soon he had passed", make a big difference in my ability to smoothly read what is written and comprehend it while I'm reading it as opposed to having to stop and rewind and carefully comprehend what I just read. Are there any formal descriptions of how I changed the above passage? It's been decades since I studied English formally and I lack understanding of precisely what I did and why it helps me so much. All I did was just tweak things in a way that suits the way I more naturally think and speak and helps me to digest things in smaller, bite-sized chunks. Also might any knowledgeable people have any suggestions for how to correct my inability to easily digest the passage as is, like exercises I can do or lighter reading which might help me to better prepare for Tolkien's writing style? I don't think Tolkien's longer sentences alone are what makes things so difficult for me to comprehend (although that was my initial suspicion), since my favorite English author of all time is Nicholson Baker who can write monstrously long 166-word sentences like this: >> But my mother’s informal punctuation in the op-ed letter came as a complete surprise; and the fact that my immediate instinctive response to it was to point out the misplaced commas so harshly that she wept (the only time, as far as I remember, that I ever hurt her feelings - for she understood and was even amused by my teenage request that whenever the two of us walked down the street together, she would please walk at least three yards ahead of me, so that people wouldn’t know we were related; and she even played along in her compliance, whistling, walking with a theatrical solitariness, checking her pocketbook, pausing abruptly to glance at a window display), as if these faulty commas called into question our standing as a family - the fact that I had been instinctively so cruel, made me double up with misery when, after I was married, I came across some sentences in Boswell that were punctuated just as hers had been. Yet I find Baker's prose extremely smooth and easy to read. I never have to backtrack and re-read anything as I navigate even his most verbose sentences and paragraphs. They all have a type of flow and cadence which seems to so perfectly suit my intuitions.
Being such an ardent appreciator of prose, you may take an interest in these authors, at some point: Sean Stewart (especially his 2000 novel, Galveston) Sofia Samatar Robert Holdstock (mainly Mythago Wood and Lavondyss) John Crowley (especially Little, Big) Roger Zelazny (Lord of Light) Max Gladstone (Three Parts Dead) Nicola Griffith
@@jakebishop7822 I haven’t yet read that one, but that’s definitely some Gladstone exposure. And of those I listed, I would say he’s not really a “brilliant” stylist like Le Guin or Wolfe, but he is particularly sharp and focused as a writer. Stewart I consider has about as perfect a balance of prose as anyone, even if he’s not quite as lyrical as Le Guin. But Galveston is so precise without being showy. Mockingbird (1997) is a bit more showy, but still pitch perfect. Crowley and Samatar are just….wow; baroque, but gorgeously so. Holdstock and Griffith are both rich and lush without being burdensome. I’ve only read a bit of Zelazny, but he’s very purposeful, demonstrating ways to be super unorthodox and strange with language while still being purposeful. Honestly, considering how much you talk about style, you might look up Le Guin’s essay, “From Elfland to Poughkeepsie,” which you can likely find on UA-cam. It’s specifically about her thoughts on how language is a crucial aspect of writing fantasy and making it believable and immersive.
Oh wow I was surprised by where you put Ruocchio! I keep hearing people talk about how good his prose is, and for some reason I thought his writing would be more similar to Andy Weir’s prose. Every time I hear someone recommend him he goes up and up in my list of authors to read! Hopefully I’ll get to him sooner rather than later. GGK is on my 2023 to read list 🙌🏼
@@jakebishop7822Haha I actually did start it! I read the first two chapters but I wasn’t feeling it at that time. But you’re right, the prose is nothing like I imagined 😮 I get what people mean when they say that it’s a sci-fi that reads like fantasy.
I would say GGK as of right now is my favourite prose writer with Hobb as a close 2nd. R Scott Bakker and Steven Erikson are also strong contenders for those spots.
@jakebishop7822 ah rip fair enough. Not that I'm a big fan, I personally didn't like his prose, and I was just wondering if you'd agree. Guess I'll never know
@@antanowrites Me not reading any of his new books is probably a hint of what I think, but I don't feel like I could place him on this chart without having read something more recently
Loved this video! Funny what you said about not being able to visualize Mark Lawrence's writing. I haven't read any of his books yet, but he let me know through a tweet that he does not visualize anything he writes. 👀 I wish you were joining in the ASOIAF read/reread-along! You could probably catch up within a week. Martin's prose is very accessible, but he still uses enough Medieval touches that it perfectly transports you. Plus his settings-especially the castle settings and The Wall-are some of my favorite settings in all of fantasy. His dialogue is also top-tier for me. I can hear every voice so distinctly as I'm reading. As for Abercrombie, I'm going to guess the "realistic" idea has to do with the psychology of the characters, specifically the ways they are motivated and the haughtiness and shame they experience. Otherwise, First Law doesn't feel realistic to me, but it's perfectly First Law. 🤷🏻♀
I definitely wouldn't catch up in a week right now. I have been slow lately. And ya, Mark Lawrence doesn't visualize anything, which I didn't learn until after I read 3 of his books and didn't visualize anything in them
@@jakebishop7822 I'm partly teasing you about catching up because you're typically able to read so quick, but nothing wrong with slowing down! 😁 I will have to "see" about Mark Lawrence's writing!
I think it would be quite interesting to have a graph with Complex/Simple (or maybe Dense/Shallow) and Terse/Flowery. The complexity being more how much theme/subtlety/imagery et cetera is present. I think some authors write terse but still complex prose, e.g. Glen Cook, while other authors write flowery but easier to parse, e.g. Rothfuss (maybe?).
@@jakebishop7822 I've only read Empire of Silence but I remember his prose as being good and complex, more complex than on your list where he is only slightly complex. I dislike John Gwynn's prose a lot, I think it's garbage. I've read two GGK and don't remember the prose too well., though it could not have been bad or I would have remembered since I'm a prose first guy. Erickson & Wolfe are well placed. I have not yet read Hobb though will likely start Farseer once I've ascended and finished the Crippled God.
For the algo - Herbert is really my only disagreement here among the authors I’ve read; I’d put him as a tad more complex but also less good. I found him clunky, prose is not one of Dune’s strong suits!
I think I would consider his ability to continually hop in between peoples heads like a madman, while maintaining clarity to be a part of "prose", and I also think how he frames dialogue while doing that is also a part of prose. And both those things push him up for me
Nice video, I think mine would be similar but I would have GGK even more on the complex side. There is research out there to suggest that works that have longer sentences are more complex to read. And for me I haven't noticed any author that writes longer compound sentences than GGK. The man will have an entire 100 word paragraph that is just one sentence! 😄
Good prose is not about whether you like it or not. I strongly dislike Charlotte Bronte's prose, Salmon Rushdie's prose and Shakespeare's prose, but they are all great prose writers. In my opinion, they are highly complex prose stylists, and my tastes run more towards the utilitarian. I think the accuracy of your axes is better left-to-right than down-to-up, although i disagree with some of your x-axis choices. For example, surely Tolkein, with T.H. White and Lord Dunsany, would be top right. Tolkein was a language professor at a world class university and had a PhD. You would expect less errors (a demonstrable metric of good prose) is his writings than, say, Brandon Sanderson's. I'm not having a go at Sanderson, but he would rank as a good, imaginative story teller (I enjoy his books), albeit a weak writer (IMHO one of the weakest on your list).
Pierce Brown will 100% be going up this list. You need to stop screwin around and start reading Iron Gold already! Butcher is my favorite writer and I'm happy with your placement. Agree with what you said about current Jim's prose in late Dresden being absolutely phenomenal. I really want you to read The Ocean at the End of the Lane by Neil Gaiman. You could literally read it in a day, and it has probably his most powerful and evocative writing. Really enjoyed the video!
This was so much fun!! I love how you almost put Hobb and GGK just off the chart (which is honestly where they deserve to be, lol). And I am here for the Sanderson defense, his prose is not nearly as bad as so many people make it out to be.
Also, I would be so down for a similar type of video but then for character work or something!!
Glad you enjoyed it! Maybe I could do quality, and moral grayness for characters
@@jakebishop7822 sounds like a plan to me :)))
19:55 I love Harry's wildly shifting perspective throughout Battle Ground.
"Those spears howled and sent concussive force and fire splashing against my shield-or missing me completely, and hitting the houses across the street."
In that fury, she was a shadow, an outline, dark and terrible and undeniable, standing against the tide unmoving.
Fun video! Sanderson is too high lol.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm
I agree. Sanderson's prose is simple, but not really good. You could call it average, at best. The best examples of writers with simple but good prose are Orwell, Hitchens and Steinbeck. Sanderson's ideas are good, his world building good, but his writing isn't good. Not bad, by any means, but not good, either. Sanderson is a savvy writer and plays to his strengths, which demonstrably is not his prose.
I've always had enormous difficulty with Tolkien's prose which disappoints me and makes me feel alienated being a fan of the fantasy genre. I did learn English as a second language (I'm from Japan), not the most well-read in English literature, and that might be an ultimate factor in my struggles along with perhaps my profession as a STEM type which has me most used to reading very technical literature above all else.
Yet I tried to take some passages from Tolkien and rewrite them to illustrate the difficulties I have with his prose. Given this:
>> Soon he had passed, like a shadow into shadow, down the winding road, and behind him still the black ranks crossed the bridge. So great an army had never issued from that vale since the days of Isildur’s might; no host so fell and strong in arms had yet assailed the fords of Anduin; and yet it was but one and not the greatest of the hosts that Mordor now sent forth.
... my brain tends to trip up reading it and I end up having to re-read often. But if I tweak it like this:
>> He soon passed, like a shadow into shadow, down the winding road. Behind him, the black ranks crossed the bridge. Such a great army had never been seen from that vale since the days of Isildur’s might; no host so fell and strong in arms had yet assailed the fords of Anduin, and yet it was but one, and not the greatest, that Mordor had sent forth.
... suddenly it's so much easier for me to digest! I suspect even these tweaks may have removed a lot of what Tolkien fans find so beautiful about his prose, but it's so much easier to comprehend now for my ESL brain. Apologies to Tolkien fans for likely butchering much of what make Tolkien's prose so beautiful in the above exercise. Yet even just little things like, "He soon passed" vs. "Soon he had passed", make a big difference in my ability to smoothly read what is written and comprehend it while I'm reading it as opposed to having to stop and rewind and carefully comprehend what I just read.
Are there any formal descriptions of how I changed the above passage? It's been decades since I studied English formally and I lack understanding of precisely what I did and why it helps me so much. All I did was just tweak things in a way that suits the way I more naturally think and speak and helps me to digest things in smaller, bite-sized chunks. Also might any knowledgeable people have any suggestions for how to correct my inability to easily digest the passage as is, like exercises I can do or lighter reading which might help me to better prepare for Tolkien's writing style?
I don't think Tolkien's longer sentences alone are what makes things so difficult for me to comprehend (although that was my initial suspicion), since my favorite English author of all time is Nicholson Baker who can write monstrously long 166-word sentences like this:
>> But my mother’s informal punctuation in the op-ed letter came as a complete surprise; and the fact that my immediate instinctive response to it was to point out the misplaced commas so harshly that she wept (the only time, as far as I remember, that I ever hurt her feelings - for she understood and was even amused by my teenage request that whenever the two of us walked down the street together, she would please walk at least three yards ahead of me, so that people wouldn’t know we were related; and she even played along in her compliance, whistling, walking with a theatrical solitariness, checking her pocketbook, pausing abruptly to glance at a window display), as if these faulty commas called into question our standing as a family - the fact that I had been instinctively so cruel, made me double up with misery when, after I was married, I came across some sentences in Boswell that were punctuated just as hers had been.
Yet I find Baker's prose extremely smooth and easy to read. I never have to backtrack and re-read anything as I navigate even his most verbose sentences and paragraphs. They all have a type of flow and cadence which seems to so perfectly suit my intuitions.
Being such an ardent appreciator of prose, you may take an interest in these authors, at some point:
Sean Stewart (especially his 2000 novel, Galveston)
Sofia Samatar
Robert Holdstock (mainly Mythago Wood and Lavondyss)
John Crowley (especially Little, Big)
Roger Zelazny (Lord of Light)
Max Gladstone (Three Parts Dead)
Nicola Griffith
I shall look into it. I have kind of read something by Max Gladstone, as he wrote half of This is How You Lose The Time War
@@jakebishop7822 I haven’t yet read that one, but that’s definitely some Gladstone exposure. And of those I listed, I would say he’s not really a “brilliant” stylist like Le Guin or Wolfe, but he is particularly sharp and focused as a writer.
Stewart I consider has about as perfect a balance of prose as anyone, even if he’s not quite as lyrical as Le Guin. But Galveston is so precise without being showy. Mockingbird (1997) is a bit more showy, but still pitch perfect.
Crowley and Samatar are just….wow; baroque, but gorgeously so. Holdstock and Griffith are both rich and lush without being burdensome.
I’ve only read a bit of Zelazny, but he’s very purposeful, demonstrating ways to be super unorthodox and strange with language while still being purposeful.
Honestly, considering how much you talk about style, you might look up Le Guin’s essay, “From Elfland to Poughkeepsie,” which you can likely find on UA-cam. It’s specifically about her thoughts on how language is a crucial aspect of writing fantasy and making it believable and immersive.
You should read Jonathan strange and mr norrell. I've read that chunker twice and I am ready to do it again.
It is on my list for this year! Few books before it, since I am behind, but it is happening for sure
Another fantastic video!!! Thank you!
Gracias
@@jakebishop7822 denada
Heck of a tier list mate! Great lineup
Oh wow I was surprised by where you put Ruocchio! I keep hearing people talk about how good his prose is, and for some reason I thought his writing would be more similar to Andy Weir’s prose. Every time I hear someone recommend him he goes up and up in my list of authors to read! Hopefully I’ll get to him sooner rather than later. GGK is on my 2023 to read list 🙌🏼
His writing is very very very different from Andy Weir. I hope you enjoy his novels
(cont’d) very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very different 😂
@@madisongoodyear5040 hahaha I swear I’m so curious now. I might give it a shot after I finish Locke Lamora 👀
@@marianamasbooks That went well
@@jakebishop7822Haha I actually did start it! I read the first two chapters but I wasn’t feeling it at that time. But you’re right, the prose is nothing like I imagined 😮 I get what people mean when they say that it’s a sci-fi that reads like fantasy.
I would say GGK as of right now is my favourite prose writer with Hobb as a close 2nd. R Scott Bakker and Steven Erikson are also strong contenders for those spots.
One of us
I’d love to see where Bakker ended up on this list. So good and so complicated so I’m guessing top right 😊
That seems to be where everyone puts him.
Hold on, did I miss Christopher Paolini, or did you not mention him? I wonder if you think he improved since his first book
I forgot about him, but haven't read any of his newer books so i don't know if I could fairly place him
@jakebishop7822 what about based on his older books though
@@antanowrites idk , it's been like 12 years since I read them
@jakebishop7822 ah rip fair enough. Not that I'm a big fan, I personally didn't like his prose, and I was just wondering if you'd agree. Guess I'll never know
@@antanowrites Me not reading any of his new books is probably a hint of what I think, but I don't feel like I could place him on this chart without having read something more recently
Love this! I think my own chart would overlap a lot, and I’m not sure where I would even strongly differ.
I'll take it!
Loved this video! Funny what you said about not being able to visualize Mark Lawrence's writing. I haven't read any of his books yet, but he let me know through a tweet that he does not visualize anything he writes. 👀
I wish you were joining in the ASOIAF read/reread-along! You could probably catch up within a week. Martin's prose is very accessible, but he still uses enough Medieval touches that it perfectly transports you. Plus his settings-especially the castle settings and The Wall-are some of my favorite settings in all of fantasy. His dialogue is also top-tier for me. I can hear every voice so distinctly as I'm reading.
As for Abercrombie, I'm going to guess the "realistic" idea has to do with the psychology of the characters, specifically the ways they are motivated and the haughtiness and shame they experience. Otherwise, First Law doesn't feel realistic to me, but it's perfectly First Law. 🤷🏻♀
I definitely wouldn't catch up in a week right now. I have been slow lately.
And ya, Mark Lawrence doesn't visualize anything, which I didn't learn until after I read 3 of his books and didn't visualize anything in them
@@jakebishop7822 I'm partly teasing you about catching up because you're typically able to read so quick, but nothing wrong with slowing down! 😁
I will have to "see" about Mark Lawrence's writing!
This video seems appropriately timed, as I've started Sailing to Sarantium this morning.
I will await reactions
@@jakebishop7822 Might be a while, the damn Prolgoue is probably about 40 pages.
I watched this video specifically to see where Guy Gavriel Kay would place on it
Love to hear it
I think it would be quite interesting to have a graph with Complex/Simple (or maybe Dense/Shallow) and Terse/Flowery. The complexity being more how much theme/subtlety/imagery et cetera is present. I think some authors write terse but still complex prose, e.g. Glen Cook, while other authors write flowery but easier to parse, e.g. Rothfuss (maybe?).
I need a 3d graph!
I wonder how adding The Silmarrilion to your Tolkien reading would affect his position. Is it complex or just exhausting?
I guess I will RAFO....eventually
Guy Gavriel Kay is my favorite author
You have good taste!
Chat GPT might give you a good measure of the reading level of each book plus could give you a ranking to compare!
Interesting idea, I may look into that
This is a good video idea, we will see if I agree with your list.
So uh....did you?
@@jakebishop7822 I've only read Empire of Silence but I remember his prose as being good and complex, more complex than on your list where he is only slightly complex. I dislike John Gwynn's prose a lot, I think it's garbage. I've read two GGK and don't remember the prose too well., though it could not have been bad or I would have remembered since I'm a prose first guy. Erickson & Wolfe are well placed. I have not yet read Hobb though will likely start Farseer once I've ascended and finished the Crippled God.
This was fun!!
For the algo - Herbert is really my only disagreement here among the authors I’ve read; I’d put him as a tad more complex but also less good. I found him clunky, prose is not one of Dune’s strong suits!
I think I would consider his ability to continually hop in between peoples heads like a madman, while maintaining clarity to be a part of "prose", and I also think how he frames dialogue while doing that is also a part of prose. And both those things push him up for me
Nice video, I think mine would be similar but I would have GGK even more on the complex side. There is research out there to suggest that works that have longer sentences are more complex to read. And for me I haven't noticed any author that writes longer compound sentences than GGK. The man will have an entire 100 word paragraph that is just one sentence! 😄
I haven't read him, but I think Cormac McCarthy is the king of long sentences
"Research shows more complex sentences are more complex to read" -🤡
That’s a format I recognize 🤔
Happy (Easter) Algorithm!
Happy Easter, it isn't exactly an uncommon format
Good prose is not about whether you like it or not. I strongly dislike Charlotte Bronte's prose, Salmon Rushdie's prose and Shakespeare's prose, but they are all great prose writers. In my opinion, they are highly complex prose stylists, and my tastes run more towards the utilitarian. I think the accuracy of your axes is better left-to-right than down-to-up, although i disagree with some of your x-axis choices. For example, surely Tolkein, with T.H. White and Lord Dunsany, would be top right. Tolkein was a language professor at a world class university and had a PhD. You would expect less errors (a demonstrable metric of good prose) is his writings than, say, Brandon Sanderson's. I'm not having a go at Sanderson, but he would rank as a good, imaginative story teller (I enjoy his books), albeit a weak writer (IMHO one of the weakest on your list).
Herman Melville dunks on all these chumps tbh
Hmmmmm
Thanx
Pierce Brown will 100% be going up this list. You need to stop screwin around and start reading Iron Gold already!
Butcher is my favorite writer and I'm happy with your placement. Agree with what you said about current Jim's prose in late Dresden being absolutely phenomenal.
I really want you to read The Ocean at the End of the Lane by Neil Gaiman. You could literally read it in a day, and it has probably his most powerful and evocative writing.
Really enjoyed the video!
I will (probably) read Iron Gold (eventually)
Neil Gaiman < Brandon Sanderson? Cant disagree more
Genuinely no complaints here haha
I'll take it!