"Books don't need to be more than 500 pages." I had a professor in college who would not give page minimums or limits on paper assignments. He said we should just write until we're finished, whether that takes more words or less. He said he would know if it was the right length. While this was annoying as an assignment (I didn't want to be marked down because of a professor's whims) I think it was actually excellent writing advice. Whatever you write shouldn't be artificially bloated or shortened. It should be exactly the length required to get the concept/story/information across.
Funny thing in high-school I had my English teacher tell a few of my other teachers to start doing that so I wouldn't write the bare minimum. 😅 I told them more words or pages doesn't mean the answer is wrong, as long as I answer correctly is what should matter
Exactly. If you're condensing and shortening the story for shorter page length because people don't like long books, you're knee-capping the story and you're selling your story short. It doesn't matter objectively if the book is 100 pages or 10,000 pages, if it tells a great story that is interesting to read and the world surrounding the story is awesome, who cares?
though that does sound awesome, i have learned that word limits often help realize which parts of my text/essay/paper are actually necessary and which ones are just fluff, or which sections need to be extended
One time, I loaned my copy of Monster, Perfect Edition Volume 1 to a coworker who was my friend. It left my possession in like-new condition, came back in a state that seemed like he had smeared his own facial greases onto it after a long day of unloading truck.
@@skyward7903 My ex-coworker borrowed a book from me once and bookmarked it with a mustard packet. He made excuses up and down that it was sealed so it's okay v.v
Unpopular opinion: the biggest reason I will hesitate to read a book? Small font size. If it's long, that's one thing, but long with tiny font means that for me, a non-avid reader trying to recover from English major burnout, it's going to be a commitment.
Getting a kindle has made me a snob about font size and book bindings. I adore the wheel of time but for my current reread I just couldn’t handle how small the font is in those books. I ended up just buying them on kindle and couldn’t be happier reading them with my custom font settings. I’ve avoided rereading mist born for ages because of this but I’m just gonna buy them on kindle when I get around to it cause I have no patience for small print.
my rating criteria is: 1 - the book pissed me off for a reason or another 2 - the book had no impact at all 3 - I enoyed it 4 - loved it and I felt intense emotions 5 - my personal Olympus give me a 1 to 100 rate system and I'll propbably implode
Same for me, I think part of the problem is when people want to rate out of objectiveness not only enjoyment. You read a good book and get why people love it, but you just didn't. (I still rate out of enjoyment in that case, just saying that's where I feel reviewers get frustrated)
Ooh, this was my unpopular opinion! I just don’t appreciate a 5 star system, I feel like it’s too limiting and doesn’t accurately reflect my opinions of a series. There are a lot of 3s, 4s and 5s that I would not equate in quality to others of the same ranking. When I personally rank I do it out of 10 but with a decimal place. Eg. The Blade Itself 8.2, The Way of Kings 9.2, Stormfront 7.3
@@DrunkenGyarados probably because you prefer to evaluate the product, while I evaluate only the impact on me. Rarely something badly executed gets my love anyway, so those are fine with 1-2 stars. Even when the systems allows me half stars I won't use them
I usually rate all books 3 stars or above because if it's a 1 or 2 star book I DNF it ahah 3- quite good but has some flaws 4- definitely a good book 5- fantastic book But decimals are more accurate, maybe I would prefer that.
Yeah, how can one not adore the 15 pages of Ned Land and Arronax's servant describing the fish that float by? That's peak Literature! Peak! Literature!
In response to watching the adaptation first I have 2 thoughts: 1. It can help readers who are not as visual better visualize what they’re reading if they’ve seen it first 2. I think it can be very helpful when you want to read an older classic to watch an adaptation first because I think it can help to better establish the setting and the story and give overall context
I find it usually works because in most cases the adaptation isn't as good but if you watch the adaptation first you'll then just really love the book for expanding on it and making it better. Whereas if you read the book you'll often be disappointed by the adaptation. Plus the adaptation is useful for figuring out if you like the premise or not because it's less of a time investment.
This is my plan with Dune. I tried reading it and couldn't get into it, so after the movie I'll give it another shot. I also watched The Princess Bride a couple dozen times before realizing it was an actual book. It's my absolute favorite movie, and reading afterwards let me see what was different without really ruining either experience.
Also with classics, language and intent with tone can be easier to grasp as well! I watched the importance of being earnest first and then decided I wanted to read it too as a 15 year old, and if I didn’t have faces to picture or a general understanding of plot it would have overwhelmed me. Jane Eyre was the same way.
I have this weird opinion that we need more maiming in stories. Casue I feel like a lot of the time it's like "We can't kill him/her!" Okey sure don't kill them but at least maim them so they can't get away, mess up their legs or something. Break some bones, cut an ear off. Especially if one character in X group has an immense hatred for the captured person and really wants to kill them but isn't allowed for whatever reason. Just do some maiming man
@@bleachedtomatoes5503 Yeah I know but it's never really used where I live (Swedish north) so I kinda forget using it from time to time but in general I try using they/them
Truth. The books that I've read this in it feels more like real life because true consequences do happen and the consequences aren't always death. Often its maiming which can be just as awful and heartbreaking without having to kill off a character.
I'm not a fan of Brandon Sanderson's works, but I think that the ability to produce consistent, fast and quality novels automatically makes you great. If I was a literary agent or an avid reader, I would probably not be enthusiastic about a long-term relationship with author whose only able to produce a good book once a decade - sorry but not sorry to Rothfuss and Martin fans.
Writers write. Rothfuss and Martindon't write much. Can you really still call them writers? And Sanderson has never blown me away, and his books lack rereadability. Once you've gotten through all the reveals and gimics, there's not a lot to the characters.
@@Ostyn-DT24 I read mistborn, and couldn't get more than 1/3 of the way through elantris. I really like Starsight. have no interest in stormlight after reading mistborn.
Here’s a hot take: I actually enjoy your ads. Usually I just skip ahead to normal content. Your ads are clever, I enjoy seeing where you’re going with them. Advertisers take note!
i liked what she was saying in the real talk video. how the weird one did really well and they were very fine with more of that. advertisers love ads that viewers enjoy, just look at the fanbase's reaction to the critical role ads. hours long compilations of nothing but sponsored content. the return that advertisers get on ads the audience likes is so much higher because we actually pay attention and engage with those ads.
Hot take: I don’t want writers to kill characters only for stakes’ sake. I actually hate that “for realism” mindset. I want GOOD endings, if that means death, then that it is. But most of the time is not. I want complete arcs, tragedy, lessons, loss, change, but I hate character deaths only because is supposed to be realistic. Sometimes a happy ending is the best way to end a story and it can be just as satisfying as a bittersweet ending. I guess what I’m saying is, write what fits the story and themes/arcs best (and what fits the tone and genre, or what subverts it if that’s what you want to say with the story). Just stay true to what you want to say and what the story means. The lord of the rings has 100 endings but it’s because the story needs them.
@@Juan_Jose_Miraballes Not really. I've seen a surprisingly large number of people advocating for the death of characters just so the story is more 'realistic'.
@@eliasbonafe9236 Exactly. But not even if there's a big final battle you need to kill everyone. If the tone, genre and message of the book fit, then by all means. But for shock value, that's how we get Allegiant Tris.
@@angiewinchester3384 Yes! And it irks me to no end. Why? Death isn't an inherently realistic ending. In the right setting and story perhaps, but not by default. And killing main characters is HARD. It's an art, really. Not every writer is good enough to pull off character deaths, anyway.
On the topic of physical books vs. audiobooks vs. ebooks: - Can't get into an ebook, especially not if it's on my phone. I find it gets tiring and distracting, for some reason. - Audiobooks are obviously super convenient, but I find that they *need* a good reader. I've abandoned quite a few audiobooks because I wasn't feeling the person reading it, even if I've come back and later enjoyed reading the physical copy. The Wax and Wayne books are excellently narrated, by the way. - Physical books are my favourite of all three. I like the way that it forces me to focus on just one thing, and the feel of holding something in your hands.
My hot take regarding audio books - to properly be able to enjoy the work, I need to be more focused on that than I would be when reading a physical book. Me, and I think most people reading physical media, tend to "skim" without realising it, especially when reading at a medium to fast pace. Listening to an audio book actually forces me to properly focus on the content rather than reading through whole paragraphs of text where I'm knowing what's going on without needing to focus as hard on the content of individual sentences (unless it's an especially poorly written book). This perception of audio books being a somehow "lazier" way of reading is a load of rubbish IMO.
@@jakerockznoodles I can see that. I'll sometimes have to sit still and basically do nothing if I'm deep in an audiobook. Or as close to still as I can, seeing as I fidget. But yeah, "audiobooks are lazy" sounds incorrect and elitist to me.
It is kinda stupid to read on your phone, especially because it's bad for your eyes. E-readers were created to get rid of this problem. As much as I like physical books (I still buy them), I have to admit that reading from e-reader is move comfortable - it's not heavy, you never get to situation that you finnished a book and have nothing else to read. I also love to read laying down on a side and that is much easier to do with a light e-reader. I have e-reader for books that I would borrow from a library and I buy physical books that I love, have beautiful covers and I would probably read them more then once. (there are probably a loooot of errors, I am after work and I am too lazy to fix it)
I've tried audiobooks and as soon as a start I always go "Who tha fuck are you?" - reading is my alone time, and there's always one person too many in audiobooks. But it depends on the reader. I never read, I just see the page and then just disappear into some sort of daydream, which I can't do with audiobooks. Also, the narrator most of the time ruins the dialogue, makes it really silly and unnatural. But I get that people read differently. EDIT: Also, I zone out easily on audiobooks.
@@Deni-mt9bj You bring up some good points - I've never given e-readers a go, so I can't comment on them. And I agree, physical books create all sorts of awkwardness, especially when trying to read in bed.
I love it when other people have rainbow shelves. They're just so pretty. But I'm loath to do mine like that as even thinking about the books in the same series not being together, or books by the same author not in one place makes me wanna punch someone.
Personally, I don't get the thing with rainbow shelves. I don't even think they're visually pleasing. I find it artificial and counterintuitive. When I come to someone's home and their shelves are not organized by genre and author, I start to hyperventilate a little, not gonna lie. :)
Happy endings are great when they feel earned. Bittersweet works when it works. I don't need a token bitter event in the ending to make it feel "realistic". Sometimes it's more realistic for a plan to go correctly because you put in all the work for it to do so.
I actually think liking happy endings has become an unpopular opinion. I think there is this weird discourse around the whole concept that has devolved into "if you prefer happy endings, if you like feel-good satisfying conclusions, if you want all the characters to live, then you are not as intelligent or clever or well-read." I feel like I hear people constantly talking about their "prefer bittersweet" or "only like dark and destructive" opinions, while the other side of the sphere is shot down or ridiculed when expressing their views. My own lukewarm take: People use "unpopular opinion" concepts as a way to mock and devalue others' preferences and views. (I absolutely don't think that you did that, nor have I seen anybody in this comment section acting like this. This is a wholesome af community.) But I do think that there are a lot of people in the greater book-loving community? bookosphere? who take advantage of this concept to feel superior by decrying the taste and interests of others. Also maps in the front of the book are the best and that opinion is the only 100% true one.
Especially because i feel like people want destructive endings just to feel edgy tbh. Half the time the ending they think should have happened would have made zero sense. A good example is the final chapter of attack on titan !SPOILERS! !SPOILERS! It would have made zero sense for Eren to succeed and return back to paradis with historia. He would not have killed his friends.
Happy endings are illogical and unrealistic, thus stupid. People started disliking it not because of some whims of time. The reason is the overall growth of intelligence and taste after 2/2 of XX century catastrophic decrease in both.
@@AERallert That's not a hot take. That is what we call a bad take. Also, your general lack of coherence belies the self proclaimed intellectual superiority of your position.
@@NoOne-qy2yf not quite. Most of the characters around at the end are around in some capacity at the beginning. The idea here is more along the lines of one character dying right before (or right after) another is introduced for the first time. So, for example, if Pippin were to have died in the barrow downs, just before they meet Aragorn, and by the end of Return of the King all four hobbits have fallen and someone else (Faramir, maybe) completes the quest.
My favorite thing is when authors put maps in the inside of the dust cover of a hardback (such as Sanderson in the Stormlight Archives does) so I don't even have to flip back, I can just map their progress with the dust cover next to me as I read.
I love maps, especially in fantasy with a lot of travel like Shannara. I almost want to get a picture of it to have on the side so I don't have to flip back to it all the time.
I like a satisfying ending. That doesn't mean it has to be happy, just followed the progression of the story. Actions have consequences, and if the author has to remove consequences to make the ending happy, I'm not a fan of that at all. Like, hey, you know all those problems that have been plaguing this character this whole time? Yeah, none of it really mattered. I appreciate maps in books, especially fantasy. I've found it useful in some nonfiction too. The third book of trilogies being unsatisfying. I think this is the exact reason Patrick rothfuss won't give us the third book. The hype is so much, and he knows he can't make everyone happy. That pressure can be crippling. I had a reading experience preference when I was younger, but now that I'm a mom of three, any way I can consume stories is a win. Audiobook, ebook, hard copy, I don't care.
I feel like a lot of people miss the point of Sanderson's writing. I don't think he set out to create stories so thematic and complex in narrative structure that it'll take scholars decades to figure out what they mean. I think he simply wants to create fantasy worlds filled with fun magic systems, unique creatures and interesting cultures that everyone can escape to. There's a reason why his fans always talk about the fantasy elements and mental health representation in his stories.
This is a straw man, nobody is saying he needs to do any of the things you mentioned. They’re just saying they don’t find them that well made. Not that they want his work to be a literary masterpiece.
Well those things are nice but they don't make a story, for me I need to enjoy the prose, enjoy the characters and the dialogue. I've read the first couple of pages of some of Sanderson's books and they just didn't interest me at all. But clearly a lot of people love his work, just because I don't doesn't mean I'm gonna claim he's a bad author.
He likes to write a lot of "Hero's Journey" stories. Even when he has an ensemble of lead characters, he puts more energy into exploring each character's personal motivations, and how that leads to internal growth, rather than making the relationships characters have with each other super nuanced. Make no mistake, he does take care to make those relationships dynamic - it's not like he doesn't put in any effort into that - but it's clear he enjoys working with each character individually, and probably conceived them during the pre-writing stage one at a time. This could lead to his stuff feeling formulaic if "Hero's Journey" stories are all one consumes, but there are plenty of stories out there which don't follow the Hero's journey.
I don't find him bad, but the unabashed praise for him has had me struggling to finish Mistborn for months. I think there's fun stuff, but it's all delivered in a very bland presentation. I think if his works got adapted, that maybe they could be improved in that way.
On reading the book first/watching the movie first: I always try to watch the movie first, then read the book. If you watch first, when you go back to read you get to experience this world that you love expanding and filling in, and also often get to enjoy whole new plotlines that were left out. On the other hand, if you read it first, when you watch the movie all you'll see is the massive amounts that were left out to hit the running time.
I'll always want to read first then watch second. Watching 1st taints the reading experience. 1. The biggest reason is that you often end up picturing the characters in the book as their film counterparts. Sometimes it's a good thing because they nail it really well, other times not so much and they can just be completely different so it throws you off when they describe someone and they are wildly different in the book. 2. If a movie or show adaptation is terrible, there is a chance that the general public will not even give their time of day to a book or series that is actually amazing because the movie was so completely botched (Eragon for example) 3. I honestly think it's good know how things are different from the book while watching the movie. That way you can have these wonderful surprises of hey that's not exactly like the book but the way they did it worked really well and makes sense. Otherwise there are times where the movie makes more of something than it is in the book. Take Lord of the rings for example, helms deep is a quarter to a 3rd of the films running time but pretty much a chapter in the book. A lot of people that went from the movie to the book could be underwhelmed where as if you read it first it's a holy crap moment.
The trouble is that movie adaptations are often WAY different from the book. There are definitely a lot of movies I'm glad I didn't see first because it would have totally turned me off the book (even if it is excellent, because visual images are so memorable). On the other hand, if I thought a book was boring but heard the movie was a big improvement...then I might watch the movie.
I really think stephen king is so beloved because of how he writes his characters. His prose is phenomenal. The relationships like how he writes the father-daughter relationship in firestarter is one of a kind. Firestarter is perfect if you like shorter novels because he does not overwrite in that one whatsoever. No other author i have ever read has made me feel the way it feels when king writes. It feels like its your uncle or grandfather telling you a story and i think thats why a lot of fans call him "uncle stevie". He has written over 60 novels and they are all connected in his multiverse so there is a HUGE amount of reference porn. I love his books so much that on release day i dont even pre-order because i dont want to wait for the mailman and i dont want it to get damaged. After reading the dark tower i want to reread all of his books in chronological order. For readers that love characters more than plot it just shocks me how they dont like stephen's characters or dont fall in love with his characters, even the bad guys are morally gray (sometimes). i just dont get it. It depends which era you read because old king and new king has a lot of differences. For anyone into science fiction or fantasy i highly recommend firestarter and the talisman. Joyland is another quick read about a coming of age kid in a amusement park. Not everybody is gonna like every author but since king has so many books in so many genres i just feel like he has something for everybody.
Here is a hot take i actually prefer falls from grace over redemption arcs. Redemption arcs are rarely ever earned especially in recent years it seems. So seeing someone fall into darkness is in my opinion more interesting of a arc
With the length of books, I remember seeing some video (forget who it was by) about "common mistakes" newbie writers make and one of them was "it's not the proper length for its genre". And I was like, "ec-frickin-scuse me?" If a book is going to be at its peak form, who gives a damn if it's 50,000 words shorter or longer than the "standard size" for its genre? It's got the same energy as your literature teacher telling you your book report has to be four pages long when your opinion can be easily explained on a single page, maybe a page and a half. Books should be written to their peak quality, not fit some arbitrary word count quota.
I love how we can all have different opinions but we can still enjoy books together and although there are certain opinions that sometimes I do not like, it is also good to listen to different points of view, I think that helps us to grow as a readers.
Yeah I’d probably half agree with the map one. Like if it said “we’d need to move our army north to bledfgshr land” what’s the use of me going to the map just to say “oh yes bledfghsr land is indeed in the north”. City or town maps on the other hand helps in the visualization of the events in the area.
I actually am the opposite 😂 I don't care for town/city maps. "Oh this house is in the city, oh the other house is also in the city... Oh this street is between the houses!" Unless the topography of the city is important of course (like districts) I just love to see the geography of the world. So yeah bledfgshr is north, but where do the people live, are there mountains, forests, historical landmarks, etc..
Thinking about an emotional impact without killing characters always brings me to Donna Noble's ending in Doctor Who. It is way more emotional seeing her lose all of her memories and character development, going back to seeing herself as nothing special, than her death could have been.
Why are you so cruel for reminding me of that????? But yeah, 100% agree. And had hot discussions with other doctor who fans that thought other companions have worse endings, and I was like "whaaat? Donna forgets EVERYTHING, she belonged there, was so happy, she made the doctor so much better, she herself became so much better, and you just erased all that in a moment??" I cried a lot after that 😢 (Sorry, you triggered me 😅)
I think the problem with some trilogies is that the writer may not have planned it to be a series in the beginning. You see this with tv shows too where you can start to tell that their just adding stuff now instead of working off of ideas that were determined from the beginning of the series. *cough*stranger things*cough
I heard somewhere that the Duffer Brothers always knew that they wanted only 5 seasons of stranger things, and knew where they wanted to go with the story. Maybe it meant it in just a broad term rather than specifics. I can see where sometimes it can feel like things are just thrown in.
I absolutely agree. Rate books out of hundred instead out of five. While I absolutely love how convenient audibooks are especially because I can listen to them at 2x speed, I don't think its quite as satisfying as reading by myself. Again, that's for me. Someone else could totally feel different about this.
Opinion: ebooks > physical. I have poor vision and basically no night vision, so the only way I can read physical books is under a lot of light. Plus, the text is often too small-I prefer sans serif fonts-and causes me eye strain and distortion. Audible books are fine, but often I can’t focus, haha! With ebooks, I can adjust text size, contrast, and device brightness. ☺️
I love how there are so many different ways to read and enjoy books nowadays. All the mediums are valid and every time I hear someone talk about how a specific one has helped them enhance their reading experience I feel so happy
I completely agree with the Sanderson take-but I think a needed counter-statement is that it's impressive in its own right. There are plenty of authors who are more skilled at penning prose, developing characters, or worlds but only put out 1/5-1/10 the volume that Sanderson ever has that you just need to appreciate the sheer professional capability of Sanderson. If the book writing world were anything like how television is, I feel Sanderson would be an absolutely AMAZING producer... and we're all a bit worse off that this reality will never come to pass. In fact, the only author working today I could say that is both more consistent and more skilled than Sanderson is [g]Oda.
Criticize the man all you want, he is one of the best selling authors of all time, and is still pumping out books left right and center. Im not the biggest Stephan King fan, but I have mad respect for his work ethic, same with Sanderson. They have earned their success.
Pretty much all of Tolkien's work is very slow and meandering. That being said, if tomorrow they discovered another 2000 pages of story for his world hidden in an old trunk somewhere, sign me up. I'm happy to live in Tolkien's world while he weaves stories around me for as long as possible. There's never been a better worldbuilder, period.
That's how I feel. I got excited for every new bit that Christopher Tolkien compiled and edited, and felt a little sad when he announced that The Fall of Gondolin was to be the last. He's just my comfort read lol
Slow and meandering is a very bad description. It misses just about everything of what makes him distinct and focuses on some subjective stuff or concerns. "Slow and meandering" is clearly an extremely plot-focused statement that fits so many writers, however it ignores how Tolkien is exactly different from most writers. In other words, in a good and proper understanding, it doesn't even apply (in a serious sense). This is just me quickly reacting to a comment so shallow I would hardly have expected it, though I guess I should nowadays.
@@cerevor I love Tolkien's work, I think my comment made that clear. However, his story pacing seems much slower to me than others I've read. My point was that it doesn't matter, because I'm just down to hang out in his world, no matter how slow, because its so immersive. If you don't like the descriptors I picked, thats fine, but you don't have to be an arrogant pseudo intellectual blow hard about it. We're all really impressed ok, take the rest of the night off.
Thank you for helping me understand why I don't like Tolkein. I have tried reading LOTR a few times and could never finish. I wanted to like them, but just couldn't. They are slow and meandering, not my style. I'm more if a "just give me the story" kind of person lol
I love listening to an audio book WHILE reading the physical book. Otherwise I’ll be lost and zone out. And also it’s so nice to be able to put it on 2x. You read faster but you also understand what you’re reading. Irl maybe it’s because I’m a very slow reader and I sometimes bore myself with my slowness.
As far as watching movies before reading the books goes. Well, I watched all the Harry Potter movies before reading any of the books. Getting into the books was like experiencing the entire thing for the first time again. I'm so happy I experienced it that way. Personally it's better when I loved a movie and discover it was based on a book.
Agreed! This happens to me with horrible adaptations too especially if I there is a cliffhanger that intrigues me. For eg: I was curious about percy Jackson after the sea of monsters cliffhanger. Then I discovered the books. Right from the first page I fell in love with Percy. Same with Avatar the Last Airbender I just found the concept really intriguing so I searched about it and found the series. I have probably watched it a hundred times now. 🙈
@@devpriyagoel yeah, Percy Jackson is another one in which the books were such a great experience. Avatar the last airbender is meant to be watched a 100 times 😁
I'm a fan of book before movie because the book will always have way more detail and worldbuilding that the movie can't fit in, either for time, or just because it's harder to world build in the medium of filmmaking. By going book first, you have all the details of the world, so when the story has to cut some parts out for time, even if it makes the story shallow or confusing, you at least will still be able to follow it, because you already have those details. I also prefer visualizing the characters and world in my head first, then seeing how close the movie is, rather than trying to read a book with a bunch of visuals already stuck in my head for the story from the films.
I watched the first HP movie at a party and promptly forgot the name because I'm that person, but I loved it. So the next day I described this super cool movie to my parents and I can still see the shocked looks on their faces when they realized they had just kind of forgotten to tell me that Harry Potter existed. Devoured the first 4 books (all that were published at the time) within the next 3 days lol
On the "reading one genre doesnt make you smarter" and your point about romance books - like you said, romance can explore other themes and really dark themes, and I love that, but in my opinion exploring the concept of love and romance and partnership is absolutely a deep theme in itself. Romantic relationships are present in everyone's lives (even if one isn't in a romantic relationship themselves, they're surrounded by them in society) and often reflect how we function individually, with other individuals, and in society as a whole. Love as a concept is infinitely interesting because it is so hard to singularly define, and can be explored in so many ways. Reading romance books can help readers explore their own relationships, their sexualities, their response to love, and so much more. People look down on romance because it is perceived as light, fluffy, or just sexy, but a theme or genre being near universal and easy to identify with does not make it vapid or empty of intelligent discussion, introspection, and value.
I actually increasingly agree with the original hot take. You're pointing out all these interesting ideas, that I've never seen explored because I haven't read many romance books, and the romance in epic fantasy feels perfunctory. So if I don't read romance I won't really have the opportunity to see these kinds of things.
@@somerandomnoob100 I suppose it depends on why you read. Personally, I read predominantly for entertainment. I rarely read thrillers or horror, because I just don't enjoy those genres. Learning from reading is definitely a plus, but I don't understand why one would only read so they can be smarter. It's down to the individual I guess
@@somerandomnoob100 I think a more accurate take would be “reading one genre doesn’t make you more worldly”. If you only read one genre, you won’t be exposed to as much as if you read a wide variety, but you’re still learning and activating the parts of your brain you wouldn’t otherwise. It makes you smarter, but it doesn’t make you more experienced or as smart as you would be if you read different genres.
Resurrection tropes makes sense to me when they are part of the overarching theme of a book or series. Yes, it obviously makes sense if it's literally a Christian allegory like Aslan, but if the author is established again and again this idea that say love is the purpose of life or that evil never truly dies or something else builds up a reason why a character could be resurrected... Then I get it. This can still be done really sloppily, but I think occasionally it might work
12:45 - Super agree. For me, if I want to experience more time with the characters, I'll just read it again. This goes for video games and movies, too. The experiences that feel really tight and engaging the whole way (that doesn't mean wall-to-wall action BTW) are the ones I return to over and over again. With the really bloated things, I may enjoy the extra time meandering with the characters on my first time through, but I'm less likely to ever want to pick it up again. I also don't understand how a out-of-100 system results in anything other than scoring that over time begins to feel kind of arbitrary. Like a 10 or even 5 point scale is enough that I understand if you like the thing or not and after that if I need to go more granular I'll listen to the actual opinion of the reviewer. And tier lists are better suited for comparisons with other similar books (or other media) than numerical scales are.
I feel the same way about tracking my reading progress. All the apps feel like a chore. Reading specific journals always have sections I find completely useless. The thing that works best for me it just a small notebook to write down title and author and maybe a few details just so I don't forget what I have read. Normally that is enough to jog my memory. I also talk with one of my bffs weekly about books we have read.
I love how you are the counter gate keeping. You just really want people to enjoy literature with no prejudice whatsoever. You are a kind soul, thank you for being this way :)
I will say, if you love prose I can understand finding Sanderson to be a little lacking, compared to HG Wells or Tolkien it is very weak in that department. But in my opinion there are strong and weak parts of every writer, Sanderson has many strengths in areas that the more highbrow kind of reader and critic finds less important, but I love him for his strengths.
As a self-confessed prose snob I have to totally agree!! From what I've read of his work, Sanderson's straightforward writing style just doesn't create enough atmosphere or tension to really immerse me in the story. The man sure knows how to structure and pace a story though so when his books get adapted to other media, we'll be in for a treat!
@@Simon-me1jl as someone that couldn't care less about the prose and considering too that english is not my first language, I adore Sanderson's direct style and it's perfect to totally inmerse me in the complicated worlds he creates. With so many weird things, if he started making weird metaphors I would not know if what he just explained is literally there or just something similar. I think his style is perfect to highlight his strengths :)
@@laiaal.3324 old comment, I know. Just wanted to say I don’t mind a slightly more direct style. I get tired of overly “flowery” description that lingers for pages. Obviously that’s only one element of the prose but I find Sanderson to be pretty good at nudging your imagination in the right direction without so many words.
Call me a masochist, but I'm still looking for a book in which half of the story is just main characters kicking ass so I have a false sense of certainty they will never be killed and then proceed to utterly butcher them one by one on the other half like it's the ending of Invinsible's first episode.
A few things: I wish maps in fantasy books were flip outs or like a bookmark so you can just have it on hand and not flip all over for it. I also totally got the octunnumi because of the cover. New books feel great, but the purpose of a book is to be loved. The more dog ears, annotations, broken spines etc. the more a book has been read and enjoyed. That being said, I hate people who write IN the book because then its distracting. And I do mostly ebooks because there are a lot of books I don't know if I want to buy and have on my shelves. I like being able to look at my bookshelf full of beloved books and also being able to recommend or loan those out to friends. So yeah I'll buy a book twice sometimes.
Maps!!! Same! Love them! I look for maps, and love to pore over them before starting the story, and I absolutely flip back and forth and back and forth, following the characters through the lands as they travel.
SAME with the maps!! Love a good map in a book. I always have to go back and refer to it when characters move. And I love referencing a map in a later book in a series to see how much of it has already been traversed, gaining expectations as to where the characters will go in the newest book.
Same, i always end up having them be a random assortment of people and characters that their description vaguely reminded me of but they then include real celebrities, live action characters and animated characters all just chilling.
Some people like to have books be pristine always, part of an beautiful collection, while others prefer to be fully engaged in their books to fully enjoy them with no worries about what it looks like. And both are valid and just right.
I enjoy watching an adaptation first so that when I read the book I can separate them and enjoy/dislike them on their own. I’ve found that if I read the story first I’m too fixated on any changes made that I end up, almost always, hating the adaptation. Howl’s Moving Castle is what got me to realize if I watch an adaptation first I can end up loving both, if I had read the book first I would have hated the movie but because I watched the movie first they both ended up being one of my favorite movies/books respectively.
10:00 - It is a general misconception that some people have in our time. They think that being anti-men means pro-women, or anti-white means pro-black, when in reality it's just the other side of the same coin. You can't be anti sexist by being a sexist to the _bad_ gender, or anti racist by being a racist to the _bad_ race.
I actually do agree with watching the adaptation first and then reading a book. I’ve done that many times it makes me more able to put faces to names and locations a more accurate picture!
Re: Resurrections One of my favorite examples of resurrection working in books is the book Jhereg. In that world, resurrection is physically actually fairly easy, provided your body isn't too messed up and you're found within a few days. Crime lords will use death as a warning; "Next time, you won't be brought back." That kind of thing. But also, and this is the part I find the most interesting, not everybody has access to resurrection because of the financial cost. You can be stabbed to death and up and walking about in a couple of days provided you have enough money or if you have a wealthy patron. I think bringing class into it really makes it adds back in at least some of the tension that lesser stories lose by having resurrection as an option.
I love the maps too, I usually spend at least a minute looking over them before starting the book. Then frequently refer to it as the characters are traveling around or mentioning locations.
Honestly, I think Sanderson got me into Fantasy again as an adult. thanks to your recommendation I started buying books again and started from Mistborn, followed by the Stormlight archive, the second Mistborn era, the Arcanum, and the Skyward books are on the way. I pretty much loved everything I read from him. And that opened the gates and got me to buy the Gentlemen bastards books, the First Law trilogy, the Expanse books and more good books.
I always would have said I prefer to read the book before I watch its adaptation, but recently I've found that the stories I see first on screen and then read tend to be the ones where I feel the most satisfied with both versions. I get to enjoy the adaptation in its own right without comparing it to the book and inevitably feeling disappointed, and then I get to see what inspired the adaptation in the first place and all the details that didn't make it into the movie or show. If there is a story where I really don't want to be robbed of experiencing it fully in book format for the first time, then I will still read the book first, but for the most part I think watching the adaptation first makes it easier to appreciate both versions more fully. Great video!
I use maps and any other reference material often when reading. It helped a ton when I was getting into A Song of Ice and Fire. I always want maps and character references, especially if there’s a lot of similar sounding names and places.
i had forgotten about this channel. it came up on my home page. i'm three videos in and my ribs hurt from laughter. i laughed at your reactions, how you stay positive even at the most outrageous of hottakes, but then... the add. i'm dying. lol
Here's a hot take: Hot takes are underrated. Listening to people's varied opinions on different subjects is a lot more fascinating than we'd like to admit.
Ooo hearing you say you have discovered authors which may better suit your tastes (even though you still live Sanderson books) has me excited to see your updated favorite authors and series list at the end of the year! Also I love maps too and am right there with you!
I would like to thank you for actually giving references for the idea of this video! So many claim originality of ripped off ideas on YT. Thank you for setting a great standard!
I picked up The Wheel Of Time because of the minimalist black covers sporting the WoT logo, and the fact that they were freaking massive books. So yeah, I judge a book by its cover and its size; possibly because that decision was maybe the best book buying decision I ever made. Also, what made me pick up that series, is that all the books had matching branding and would look good on my shelf. So if a series matches, then I WILL get sucked in, even if I'm not that interested in it.
I have bought one book exclusively because I fell in love with the cover. It's called 'De verdovers' by Anna Enquist. The cover is black with in the middle a photograph of a sleeping swan, with its head tucked away under its wing so it is the shape of a drop. Great book, amazing cover
I actually watched the Lord of the Rings movies before reading the books and found it super helpful to orient myself because I would recognize a line from the movie and go 'oh, that's where I am!' I often found the books really disorienting at times because there was so much deleted stuff and having watched the movies first was really useful for me to follow along with the books
I am just the same with maps, I love to know where characters are and how their location relates to the rest of the word. Maps of cities don't do as much for me, but when a character says "we need to go to country B!" and I can check the map and think damn that's far and then another character will say "but that's a 3 week ride!" that makes me happy. Idk why
Yeah, honestly I think that long-running series, whether it's TV, books, movies, etc., are underrated. I understand that they're a much larger commitment but you can get so much more depth in the story, characters, world, etc., that to me it's worth it. Most of my favorite books and TV are longer than average.
You changed my mind on how I should look at the map in the beginning of a book! While I have looked at them, I should “study them” and track the progress.
I agree with the bittersweet endings! If a book ends in a completely happy way, it might make me happy. But if it ends bittersweet, it's much more likely to be one of my top books.
I loved Daniel's livestream yesterday where Joe Ambercrombie explained he does not put maps at the beginning of the book specifically because he knows some readers use them like Merphy. Sometimes a writer doesn't want you to stop reading to look at a map. Authors have to think about every single thing they put in the books, it's fascinating.
I saw something on Facebook or somewhere else that I am absolutely going to steal and use if I ever publish my works. It was a fold-out map. It sits at the back of the book and you just unfold it whenever you read so you can just glance over to see the place and then go back to reading.
I exclusively use good reads as a place to keep a list of the books I want to read. When I hear a book tuber or a friend recommend a book I’ll pull out my phone, read a couple quick review on Good Reads and add it to my “Want to Read” list. For that propose I think it’s great.
My Unpopular Opinions I guess lol i couldn't care less if a book uses a well known trope like the ressurection trope, the chosen one trope, or lost royal trope. In fact, I love them lol. And I will honestly read the same story ten thousand times over in a different cover. I love original stories, but I also don't care if I already have read ten books like the new one I've picked up. It actually makes me happy and comfortable when I can see everything coming. I can't usually see things coming in original stories because I'm a little bit of a dumb dumb. (I admit that sometimes in original, fresh stories I sometimes skip to the middle and the ending and read a couple pages just so I know something that will happen and can try to predict things around it.) YA books can be very shallow and similar but that doesn't make them objectively bad. People put too much value in morally grey characters who aren't grey so much as very close to evil or just terrible. I feel like that's almost as unrealistic as a completely good character. Of course there are exceptions but irl, i don't think that's the rule. I'd love to read more characters closer to the middle on morality. The BEST Way to remember your place in a book is to slam the book shut and pretend you remember the page, then when you come back flip through spoilers and things you've already read to find your exact place. Or, alternatively, just psychically open to the exact right page.
totally totally agree! I love a character that tries to be good, but is flawed or makes bad decisions in the moment, but characters that are just slightly less evil then the antagonist are so overrated. I like a main character who is trying to do improve the world they are in. As far as original stories vs tropes give me tropes every time. I get why people hav a problem with "chosen ones" but just because your main character is the one that saves the day doesnt mean they are a chosen one. I mean if it was a historic event and you wanted to tell the story of what happened you would focus on the person/people that had the biggest impact on the outcome. So why, if telling about a huge conflict, would you not focus on the character that decides the outcome?
I like the Lost Royal trope, full stop. Chosen Ones can be done EXTREMELY well if the status isn't just good and there's no guarentee of success. Resurrection can work if the character was 'dead' before the plot started or if it's a comedy or an established thing.
"people put too much value in morally grey characters who aren't grey so much as very close to evil or just terrible." exactly how i feel about severus snape. just because he wanted to get back at magic hitler doesn't mean he was a good person. he was constantly disregarding lily's feelings even before calling her a slur, joined the magic nazis because he wanted to, asked for lily's husband and child to be killed and then literally abused that son along with countless other children for no reason other than the fact that he was spiteful his own fucking actions had consequences. sorry if this was too much, i have very strong feelings about this lol
I agree with you on covers, I mainly buy used and mostly pulp paperbacks where the blurb and cover are all you can base the decision on, so I have a stack of pulp sci-fi/fantasy novels to read all with kickass retro covers that I bought and will read because they look cool
* people criticising Sanderson * me: Ok, i get that. * people criticising Tolkien * me: I see, i guess you have a different taste on books. * people criticising Oda * me: LISTEN HERE YOU LIL SHI. . .
Hot take: the romances should have a happy ending is such an American take. I discovered it for the first time when online and it shocked me? In the romance section on my country it's not uncommon to have books with bad or bittersweet endings, actually the most famous historical romantic story in my country ends with one of the persons being murdered. And then I moved to China, and there you have a 50/50 on picking a random romance book and it having a happy ending. So I'm always surprised when I'm discussing books online and it gets to a point where I hear "if it doesn't have a happy ending it's NOT romance!!"
Lol I've read some wonderful romances with no HEA. However, the "women's fiction" genre seems to be where the non-HEA romances go now which I avoid because I know it won't be a happy ending ahead of time. The genre is literally a spoiler for me. If there is no HEA I don't want to know. If I know, I won't get attached to the characters out of fear of being devastated.
Only time I was glad I saw an adaptation first was The Witcher. The Last Wish would have been a DNF if I didn't already know how that mess interconnected already. I have thoroughly enjoyed the next 4 books so far so I'm glad I had the show to help me trudge through that first book.
Just curious, why did you think The Last Wish was a mess? From what I remember it's just a collection of short stories that aren't even really connected right? So why would you call 5 short seperate adventures of Geralt "a mess"? I'd understand if you called the later books a mess but why the first one?
@@tommy_svk they are out of chronological order which isn't usually my fav. Plus at the beginning of each short story is a snippet of another story. So the format is: here's is 1/7 of a story, now here's a different story, now here's another 1/7 of that story, now here's a different story, etc. I just found it annoying and confusing. I will say that I was listening to the audiobook for it which I don't think helped for this particular book. I feel like I would have been less confused reading it physically. I have sense re-read it in chronological order and read the 1-7 snippets all together as well. Helped my comprehension a ton.
@@kimbeverly8960 I see. The stories are out of order but it literally doesn't matter since they're not connected. You can read them in whatever order you want and they still make sense. I can see the inbetween story being confusing for some people though, even though I had no troubles with it. It's just a book about Geralt relaxing in this place and having flashbacks about his previous adventures, pretty simple. But I get that it could confuse you, the audiobooks were definitely the biggest factor in this.
3:14 me too! I study the maps before I start the book, and notice things on it! And I will often interrupt the story to stare at the map more to know where the characters are. I love a well-drawn, detailed map. I want all my fantasy books set in other worlds to have maps! I love maps!
the problem i have with those "feminist" books that just have mean/bully leads.. if the roles were reversed, boy would that incur a shitstorm of epic proportions, for being so misogynistic...i dont like the double standard the funny thing about Stephen King,.. in my opini0on,.. is that his books under his psydonym of Richard Bachman are all way superior to his normal books. i agree with the "you dont need to kill your characters to have an impactfull story" opinion,.. BUT their actions/decisions NEED to have consequences.. and that is my problem with all the superhero stories,.. if you think about it, nothing happens, no consequences to any actions,.. and if someone is killed, he comes back some time later,...
I agree, they don't necessarily need to die but if none of the characters fuck up in a major way that has lasting consequences then I'm not usually interested if it's a long series. It's unrealistic how many main characters don't hugely fuck up and realise they're in the wrong
I don’t judge anyone for the method of their reading. I personally cannot keep my attention on an audiobook because I space out for large chunks of it. A very small part of it is the narrator, but in general my audio processing is just trash and I start thinking about other things. It’s so bad but I want audiobooks to work for me so badly. They just don’t 😩
Omg so true... I tried listening to audio books, but I just couldn't keep up. I thought I was the only one who spaces out. Somehow, I just don't connect with audio books and don't feel satisfied after reading an eBook. I feel terrible that I only enjoy physical books.
"Samwise didn't want to help people" Well duh, everyone cares about saving the world mostly because they love someone in it. No one wants to willingly run in such danger for the sake of a bunch of strangers, unless you are Jesus Christ or some shallow anime maiden
Technically he indirectly wanted to help save people because he is a good friend and wanted to help Frodo and share his burden of the ring. And that is what makes him a great character.
@@curranfrank2854 yes, but those doctors are not the average gardner minding his own business thrown upside down abruptly out of home. Usually the characters that go save the world don't live for the mission to save people, because readers recognize themselves more in the average guy being there by chance
I tried Locke Lamora because you hyped it up so much and I think ITS SO GOOD. Locke and Jean’s friendship is just chef’s kiss and their thievery is just so fascinating and always ends differently than I expect.
“No one likes the maps at the start of books”
GEOGRAPHY IS EVERYTHING SMH
Yeah I love maps at the start of books. Feels very adventurous
As a lotr fan, I like my maps at the end of the book
It makes reading feel like a chore to me. I usually just skip the maps and go straight to the story.
@@firstlast-oo1he I personally disagree. It helps me to work out where everyone is in relation to each other.
Same, I flip back to the map when places are mentioned in the story.
"Books don't need to be more than 500 pages."
I had a professor in college who would not give page minimums or limits on paper assignments. He said we should just write until we're finished, whether that takes more words or less. He said he would know if it was the right length. While this was annoying as an assignment (I didn't want to be marked down because of a professor's whims) I think it was actually excellent writing advice. Whatever you write shouldn't be artificially bloated or shortened. It should be exactly the length required to get the concept/story/information across.
TRUE thhooughh! ^-^
Funny thing in high-school I had my English teacher tell a few of my other teachers to start doing that so I wouldn't write the bare minimum. 😅 I told them more words or pages doesn't mean the answer is wrong, as long as I answer correctly is what should matter
Exactly. If you're condensing and shortening the story for shorter page length because people don't like long books, you're knee-capping the story and you're selling your story short.
It doesn't matter objectively if the book is 100 pages or 10,000 pages, if it tells a great story that is interesting to read and the world surrounding the story is awesome, who cares?
Depends on content sometimes stories need more pages to be told sometimes need less, also the text book thing
though that does sound awesome, i have learned that word limits often help realize which parts of my text/essay/paper are actually necessary and which ones are just fluff, or which sections need to be extended
Dog-earing your own books is fine. Dog-earing someone else's books... not so much.
Giving back someone's book with a torn cover and half the pages missing like nothing's wrong isn't either
My cousin gifted me a book once with bloodstains in it. He wanted to read it before giving it to me and had a nosebleed. :/
One time, I loaned my copy of Monster, Perfect Edition Volume 1 to a coworker who was my friend. It left my possession in like-new condition, came back in a state that seemed like he had smeared his own facial greases onto it after a long day of unloading truck.
@@skyward7903 My ex-coworker borrowed a book from me once and bookmarked it with a mustard packet. He made excuses up and down that it was sealed so it's okay v.v
Big brain move: notes in the margins of library books
Unpopular opinion: the biggest reason I will hesitate to read a book?
Small font size.
If it's long, that's one thing, but long with tiny font means that for me, a non-avid reader trying to recover from English major burnout, it's going to be a commitment.
Agree!
Getting a kindle has made me a snob about font size and book bindings. I adore the wheel of time but for my current reread I just couldn’t handle how small the font is in those books. I ended up just buying them on kindle and couldn’t be happier reading them with my custom font settings. I’ve avoided rereading mist born for ages because of this but I’m just gonna buy them on kindle when I get around to it cause I have no patience for small print.
I wholeheartedly believe the physical characteristics of the book affect the reader’s experience, and nothing helps like a clean, well spaced font!
Me too. If the font size is so small that you have to get a magnifier to read it I'm not reading it.
*Cries in lord of the rings*
Friends to lovers this, enemies to lovers that. We all know enemies to friends is the superior trope
I see your enemies to friends and I raise you on friends to enemies
Yes! Agreed!
Many shonen manga have plenty of that
Lovers to enemies is superior to the reverse.
my rating criteria is:
1 - the book pissed me off for a reason or another
2 - the book had no impact at all
3 - I enoyed it
4 - loved it and I felt intense emotions
5 - my personal Olympus
give me a 1 to 100 rate system and I'll propbably implode
Same for me, I think part of the problem is when people want to rate out of objectiveness not only enjoyment. You read a good book and get why people love it, but you just didn't. (I still rate out of enjoyment in that case, just saying that's where I feel reviewers get frustrated)
Ooh, this was my unpopular opinion! I just don’t appreciate a 5 star system, I feel like it’s too limiting and doesn’t accurately reflect my opinions of a series. There are a lot of 3s, 4s and 5s that I would not equate in quality to others of the same ranking. When I personally rank I do it out of 10 but with a decimal place. Eg. The Blade Itself 8.2, The Way of Kings 9.2, Stormfront 7.3
@@DrunkenGyarados probably because you prefer to evaluate the product, while I evaluate only the impact on me. Rarely something badly executed gets my love anyway, so those are fine with 1-2 stars. Even when the systems allows me half stars I won't use them
I usually rate all books 3 stars or above because if it's a 1 or 2 star book I DNF it ahah
3- quite good but has some flaws
4- definitely a good book
5- fantastic book
But decimals are more accurate, maybe I would prefer that.
Literally same.
"20000 Leagues Under the Sea. It was okay."
Blink-and-you-miss-it" hot take right there, hoo boy.
Yeah, how can one not adore the 15 pages of Ned Land and Arronax's servant describing the fish that float by? That's peak Literature!
Peak! Literature!
@@matthiasschulz3569 Tom Bombadil
I’m sorry, it reads like a late 19th Century biology textbook/travel guide.
@@TerrificRallyMaestro God*
@@JimBowen1 yes, and unless you know all of the scientific terms half the descriptions don't make sense
In response to watching the adaptation first I have 2 thoughts:
1. It can help readers who are not as visual better visualize what they’re reading if they’ve seen it first
2. I think it can be very helpful when you want to read an older classic to watch an adaptation first because I think it can help to better establish the setting and the story and give overall context
I find it usually works because in most cases the adaptation isn't as good but if you watch the adaptation first you'll then just really love the book for expanding on it and making it better. Whereas if you read the book you'll often be disappointed by the adaptation.
Plus the adaptation is useful for figuring out if you like the premise or not because it's less of a time investment.
This is my plan with Dune. I tried reading it and couldn't get into it, so after the movie I'll give it another shot.
I also watched The Princess Bride a couple dozen times before realizing it was an actual book. It's my absolute favorite movie, and reading afterwards let me see what was different without really ruining either experience.
I am totally #teamaddaptationfirst too, for all the reasons mentioned
@@seanaugust Stardust is the same way. I loved the movie then realised it was a book and loved the book for all those added details.
Also with classics, language and intent with tone can be easier to grasp as well! I watched the importance of being earnest first and then decided I wanted to read it too as a 15 year old, and if I didn’t have faces to picture or a general understanding of plot it would have overwhelmed me. Jane Eyre was the same way.
I have this weird opinion that we need more maiming in stories. Casue I feel like a lot of the time it's like "We can't kill him/her!" Okey sure don't kill them but at least maim them so they can't get away, mess up their legs or something. Break some bones, cut an ear off. Especially if one character in X group has an immense hatred for the captured person and really wants to kill them but isn't allowed for whatever reason. Just do some maiming man
100% agree
Agree. But is it probably because the grief after the incident (and anger and desperation etc) is so hard to write many authors avoid it?
Is it really that hard to use “them”? He/her is very excluding gender-wise :-)
@@bleachedtomatoes5503 Yeah I know but it's never really used where I live (Swedish north) so I kinda forget using it from time to time but in general I try using they/them
Truth. The books that I've read this in it feels more like real life because true consequences do happen and the consequences aren't always death. Often its maiming which can be just as awful and heartbreaking without having to kill off a character.
"Sanderson isn't that great, just consistent and fast"
Wow a hot take that's actually a hot take, those are rare
It is true, though...
Not really a hot take. These days one of the more common takes about him actually.
@@adaptking3170 yeah this is a take held by about half the people on the internet who vocally discuss sanderson.
@@AtticsTV I'm pretty sure the people saying he's not great are a minority.
I mean look at the ratio.
True though... if he put more time into his books they would just be (almost) as well written as the name of the wind....
I'm not a fan of Brandon Sanderson's works, but I think that the ability to produce consistent, fast and quality novels automatically makes you great. If I was a literary agent or an avid reader, I would probably not be enthusiastic about a long-term relationship with author whose only able to produce a good book once a decade - sorry but not sorry to Rothfuss and Martin fans.
Writers write. Rothfuss and Martindon't write much. Can you really still call them writers?
And Sanderson has never blown me away, and his books lack rereadability. Once you've gotten through all the reveals and gimics, there's not a lot to the characters.
Yeah that’s why my favorite author is Mark Lawrence u know that the books will come. Being a Martin fan sounds like torture.
@@therandom58 Martin puts out a good amount stuff though, just not in the main series lol
@@taragonleaf8005 I humbly say, you are missing sooo many things in his books if you think this is true.
@@Ostyn-DT24 I read mistborn, and couldn't get more than 1/3 of the way through elantris. I really like Starsight. have no interest in stormlight after reading mistborn.
Here’s a hot take: I actually enjoy your ads. Usually I just skip ahead to normal content. Your ads are clever, I enjoy seeing where you’re going with them. Advertisers take note!
Good take, her ads aren’t as off-putting as the usual ad breaks. Doesn’t help with the UA-cam 16+ and gambling game ads tough :D
i liked what she was saying in the real talk video. how the weird one did really well and they were very fine with more of that. advertisers love ads that viewers enjoy, just look at the fanbase's reaction to the critical role ads. hours long compilations of nothing but sponsored content.
the return that advertisers get on ads the audience likes is so much higher because we actually pay attention and engage with those ads.
your mind would be blown by internet historian then
look up the ad cinematic universe internet historian
@@WookieWarriorzHarry Mack is the best in the business for ad spots!
Daniel Greene’s are also pretty good imo.
Hot take: I don’t want writers to kill characters only for stakes’ sake. I actually hate that “for realism” mindset. I want GOOD endings, if that means death, then that it is. But most of the time is not. I want complete arcs, tragedy, lessons, loss, change, but I hate character deaths only because is supposed to be realistic. Sometimes a happy ending is the best way to end a story and it can be just as satisfying as a bittersweet ending. I guess what I’m saying is, write what fits the story and themes/arcs best (and what fits the tone and genre, or what subverts it if that’s what you want to say with the story). Just stay true to what you want to say and what the story means. The lord of the rings has 100 endings but it’s because the story needs them.
That is a cold take if I ever seen one.
@@Juan_Jose_Miraballes Not really. I've seen a surprisingly large number of people advocating for the death of characters just so the story is more 'realistic'.
What if "what you want to say and what the story means" is a realistic and unjust world? Don't see anything wrong in realism of characters death there
@@eliasbonafe9236 Exactly. But not even if there's a big final battle you need to kill everyone. If the tone, genre and message of the book fit, then by all means. But for shock value, that's how we get Allegiant Tris.
@@angiewinchester3384 Yes! And it irks me to no end. Why? Death isn't an inherently realistic ending. In the right setting and story perhaps, but not by default. And killing main characters is HARD. It's an art, really. Not every writer is good enough to pull off character deaths, anyway.
On the topic of physical books vs. audiobooks vs. ebooks:
- Can't get into an ebook, especially not if it's on my phone. I find it gets tiring and distracting, for some reason.
- Audiobooks are obviously super convenient, but I find that they *need* a good reader. I've abandoned quite a few audiobooks because I wasn't feeling the person reading it, even if I've come back and later enjoyed reading the physical copy. The Wax and Wayne books are excellently narrated, by the way.
- Physical books are my favourite of all three. I like the way that it forces me to focus on just one thing, and the feel of holding something in your hands.
My hot take regarding audio books - to properly be able to enjoy the work, I need to be more focused on that than I would be when reading a physical book.
Me, and I think most people reading physical media, tend to "skim" without realising it, especially when reading at a medium to fast pace. Listening to an audio book actually forces me to properly focus on the content rather than reading through whole paragraphs of text where I'm knowing what's going on without needing to focus as hard on the content of individual sentences (unless it's an especially poorly written book).
This perception of audio books being a somehow "lazier" way of reading is a load of rubbish IMO.
@@jakerockznoodles I can see that. I'll sometimes have to sit still and basically do nothing if I'm deep in an audiobook. Or as close to still as I can, seeing as I fidget. But yeah, "audiobooks are lazy" sounds incorrect and elitist to me.
It is kinda stupid to read on your phone, especially because it's bad for your eyes. E-readers were created to get rid of this problem. As much as I like physical books (I still buy them), I have to admit that reading from e-reader is move comfortable - it's not heavy, you never get to situation that you finnished a book and have nothing else to read. I also love to read laying down on a side and that is much easier to do with a light e-reader. I have e-reader for books that I would borrow from a library and I buy physical books that I love, have beautiful covers and I would probably read them more then once. (there are probably a loooot of errors, I am after work and I am too lazy to fix it)
I've tried audiobooks and as soon as a start I always go "Who tha fuck are you?" - reading is my alone time, and there's always one person too many in audiobooks. But it depends on the reader. I never read, I just see the page and then just disappear into some sort of daydream, which I can't do with audiobooks.
Also, the narrator most of the time ruins the dialogue, makes it really silly and unnatural. But I get that people read differently.
EDIT: Also, I zone out easily on audiobooks.
@@Deni-mt9bj You bring up some good points - I've never given e-readers a go, so I can't comment on them. And I agree, physical books create all sorts of awkwardness, especially when trying to read in bed.
I love it when other people have rainbow shelves. They're just so pretty. But I'm loath to do mine like that as even thinking about the books in the same series not being together, or books by the same author not in one place makes me wanna punch someone.
Same!!
I actually hate rainbow shelves. It's so annoying for my eyes :)
Personally, I don't get the thing with rainbow shelves. I don't even think they're visually pleasing. I find it artificial and counterintuitive. When I come to someone's home and their shelves are not organized by genre and author, I start to hyperventilate a little, not gonna lie. :)
Happy endings are great when they feel earned. Bittersweet works when it works. I don't need a token bitter event in the ending to make it feel "realistic". Sometimes it's more realistic for a plan to go correctly because you put in all the work for it to do so.
I actually think liking happy endings has become an unpopular opinion. I think there is this weird discourse around the whole concept that has devolved into "if you prefer happy endings, if you like feel-good satisfying conclusions, if you want all the characters to live, then you are not as intelligent or clever or well-read." I feel like I hear people constantly talking about their "prefer bittersweet" or "only like dark and destructive" opinions, while the other side of the sphere is shot down or ridiculed when expressing their views.
My own lukewarm take: People use "unpopular opinion" concepts as a way to mock and devalue others' preferences and views. (I absolutely don't think that you did that, nor have I seen anybody in this comment section acting like this. This is a wholesome af community.) But I do think that there are a lot of people in the greater book-loving community? bookosphere? who take advantage of this concept to feel superior by decrying the taste and interests of others.
Also maps in the front of the book are the best and that opinion is the only 100% true one.
I prefer bittersweet, but have nothing against happy endings. Actually I think we need to keep a healthy mix of all kinds of endings.
Especially because i feel like people want destructive endings just to feel edgy tbh. Half the time the ending they think should have happened would have made zero sense.
A good example is the final chapter of attack on titan
!SPOILERS!
!SPOILERS!
It would have made zero sense for Eren to succeed and return back to paradis with historia. He would not have killed his friends.
Happy endings are illogical and unrealistic, thus stupid. People started disliking it not because of some whims of time. The reason is the overall growth of intelligence and taste after 2/2 of XX century catastrophic decrease in both.
@@AERallert ?
@@AERallert That's not a hot take. That is what we call a bad take. Also, your general lack of coherence belies the self proclaimed intellectual superiority of your position.
I'd love to see a book with a cast of characters that slowly die off and get replaced till the final group has no original members.
Asoiaf
Well kind of
I'll add it to my list of prompts.
@@NoOne-qy2yf ASOIAF has too many characters for this type of prompt I think. 4-7 cast would be ideal.
@@NoOne-qy2yf not quite. Most of the characters around at the end are around in some capacity at the beginning. The idea here is more along the lines of one character dying right before (or right after) another is introduced for the first time. So, for example, if Pippin were to have died in the barrow downs, just before they meet Aragorn, and by the end of Return of the King all four hobbits have fallen and someone else (Faramir, maybe) completes the quest.
The Dune Saga does this (besides 1 semi-side character) when you get to the 4th book, God Emperor of Dune.
My favorite thing is when authors put maps in the inside of the dust cover of a hardback (such as Sanderson in the Stormlight Archives does) so I don't even have to flip back, I can just map their progress with the dust cover next to me as I read.
I love maps, especially in fantasy with a lot of travel like Shannara. I almost want to get a picture of it to have on the side so I don't have to flip back to it all the time.
I like a satisfying ending. That doesn't mean it has to be happy, just followed the progression of the story. Actions have consequences, and if the author has to remove consequences to make the ending happy, I'm not a fan of that at all. Like, hey, you know all those problems that have been plaguing this character this whole time? Yeah, none of it really mattered.
I appreciate maps in books, especially fantasy. I've found it useful in some nonfiction too.
The third book of trilogies being unsatisfying. I think this is the exact reason Patrick rothfuss won't give us the third book. The hype is so much, and he knows he can't make everyone happy. That pressure can be crippling.
I had a reading experience preference when I was younger, but now that I'm a mom of three, any way I can consume stories is a win. Audiobook, ebook, hard copy, I don't care.
I feel like a lot of people miss the point of Sanderson's writing.
I don't think he set out to create stories so thematic and complex in narrative structure that it'll take scholars decades to figure out what they mean.
I think he simply wants to create fantasy worlds filled with fun magic systems, unique creatures and interesting cultures that everyone can escape to.
There's a reason why his fans always talk about the fantasy elements and mental health representation in his stories.
This is a straw man, nobody is saying he needs to do any of the things you mentioned. They’re just saying they don’t find them that well made.
Not that they want his work to be a literary masterpiece.
@@YourBlackLocal Hmm, so basically you're saying that what he's offering, in theory, is worthwhile BUT the delivery of those elements is weak?
Well those things are nice but they don't make a story, for me I need to enjoy the prose, enjoy the characters and the dialogue. I've read the first couple of pages of some of Sanderson's books and they just didn't interest me at all. But clearly a lot of people love his work, just because I don't doesn't mean I'm gonna claim he's a bad author.
He likes to write a lot of "Hero's Journey" stories. Even when he has an ensemble of lead characters, he puts more energy into exploring each character's personal motivations, and how that leads to internal growth, rather than making the relationships characters have with each other super nuanced. Make no mistake, he does take care to make those relationships dynamic - it's not like he doesn't put in any effort into that - but it's clear he enjoys working with each character individually, and probably conceived them during the pre-writing stage one at a time. This could lead to his stuff feeling formulaic if "Hero's Journey" stories are all one consumes, but there are plenty of stories out there which don't follow the Hero's journey.
I don't find him bad, but the unabashed praise for him has had me struggling to finish Mistborn for months. I think there's fun stuff, but it's all delivered in a very bland presentation. I think if his works got adapted, that maybe they could be improved in that way.
On reading the book first/watching the movie first:
I always try to watch the movie first, then read the book. If you watch first, when you go back to read you get to experience this world that you love expanding and filling in, and also often get to enjoy whole new plotlines that were left out. On the other hand, if you read it first, when you watch the movie all you'll see is the massive amounts that were left out to hit the running time.
I'll always want to read first then watch second. Watching 1st taints the reading experience.
1. The biggest reason is that you often end up picturing the characters in the book as their film counterparts. Sometimes it's a good thing because they nail it really well, other times not so much and they can just be completely different so it throws you off when they describe someone and they are wildly different in the book.
2. If a movie or show adaptation is terrible, there is a chance that the general public will not even give their time of day to a book or series that is actually amazing because the movie was so completely botched (Eragon for example)
3. I honestly think it's good know how things are different from the book while watching the movie. That way you can have these wonderful surprises of hey that's not exactly like the book but the way they did it worked really well and makes sense. Otherwise there are times where the movie makes more of something than it is in the book. Take Lord of the rings for example, helms deep is a quarter to a 3rd of the films running time but pretty much a chapter in the book. A lot of people that went from the movie to the book could be underwhelmed where as if you read it first it's a holy crap moment.
The trouble is that movie adaptations are often WAY different from the book. There are definitely a lot of movies I'm glad I didn't see first because it would have totally turned me off the book (even if it is excellent, because visual images are so memorable). On the other hand, if I thought a book was boring but heard the movie was a big improvement...then I might watch the movie.
I really think stephen king is so beloved because of how he writes his characters. His prose is phenomenal. The relationships like how he writes the father-daughter relationship in firestarter is one of a kind. Firestarter is perfect if you like shorter novels because he does not overwrite in that one whatsoever. No other author i have ever read has made me feel the way it feels when king writes. It feels like its your uncle or grandfather telling you a story and i think thats why a lot of fans call him "uncle stevie". He has written over 60 novels and they are all connected in his multiverse so there is a HUGE amount of reference porn. I love his books so much that on release day i dont even pre-order because i dont want to wait for the mailman and i dont want it to get damaged. After reading the dark tower i want to reread all of his books in chronological order. For readers that love characters more than plot it just shocks me how they dont like stephen's characters or dont fall in love with his characters, even the bad guys are morally gray (sometimes). i just dont get it. It depends which era you read because old king and new king has a lot of differences. For anyone into science fiction or fantasy i highly recommend firestarter and the talisman. Joyland is another quick read about a coming of age kid in a amusement park. Not everybody is gonna like every author but since king has so many books in so many genres i just feel like he has something for everybody.
Nobody else does what is essentially urban fantasy that always seems like it is rooted in the real world nearly as well as King.
Here is a hot take i actually prefer falls from grace over redemption arcs. Redemption arcs are rarely ever earned especially in recent years it seems. So seeing someone fall into darkness is in my opinion more interesting of a arc
While I love both, I would like to see more falls from graces especially for main characters
@@metumortis6323 Agreed 100%
I don't think i have ever read a book that had falls from grace trope, so i'm intrigued about reading such a book.
They are so rare which makes it interesting
@@Zivilin The Young Elites by Marie Lu has this.
With the length of books, I remember seeing some video (forget who it was by) about "common mistakes" newbie writers make and one of them was "it's not the proper length for its genre". And I was like, "ec-frickin-scuse me?" If a book is going to be at its peak form, who gives a damn if it's 50,000 words shorter or longer than the "standard size" for its genre? It's got the same energy as your literature teacher telling you your book report has to be four pages long when your opinion can be easily explained on a single page, maybe a page and a half. Books should be written to their peak quality, not fit some arbitrary word count quota.
I love how we can all have different opinions but we can still enjoy books together and although there are certain opinions that sometimes I do not like, it is also good to listen to different points of view, I think that helps us to grow as a readers.
Yeah I’d probably half agree with the map one. Like if it said “we’d need to move our army north to bledfgshr land” what’s the use of me going to the map just to say “oh yes bledfghsr land is indeed in the north”. City or town maps on the other hand helps in the visualization of the events in the area.
I actually am the opposite 😂 I don't care for town/city maps. "Oh this house is in the city, oh the other house is also in the city... Oh this street is between the houses!" Unless the topography of the city is important of course (like districts)
I just love to see the geography of the world. So yeah bledfgshr is north, but where do the people live, are there mountains, forests, historical landmarks, etc..
Thinking about an emotional impact without killing characters always brings me to Donna Noble's ending in Doctor Who. It is way more emotional seeing her lose all of her memories and character development, going back to seeing herself as nothing special, than her death could have been.
Why are you so cruel for reminding me of that????? But yeah, 100% agree. And had hot discussions with other doctor who fans that thought other companions have worse endings, and I was like "whaaat? Donna forgets EVERYTHING, she belonged there, was so happy, she made the doctor so much better, she herself became so much better, and you just erased all that in a moment??" I cried a lot after that 😢
(Sorry, you triggered me 😅)
Umm.... Spoilers bro??😭
@@havewissmart9602 It aired 11 years ago. A decade is plenty of time to catch up on something.
I think the problem with some trilogies is that the writer may not have planned it to be a series in the beginning. You see this with tv shows too where you can start to tell that their just adding stuff now instead of working off of ideas that were determined from the beginning of the series. *cough*stranger things*cough
I heard somewhere that the Duffer Brothers always knew that they wanted only 5 seasons of stranger things, and knew where they wanted to go with the story. Maybe it meant it in just a broad term rather than specifics. I can see where sometimes it can feel like things are just thrown in.
I absolutely agree. Rate books out of hundred instead out of five. While I absolutely love how convenient audibooks are especially because I can listen to them at 2x speed, I don't think its quite as satisfying as reading by myself. Again, that's for me. Someone else could totally feel different about this.
It would be best to scale the /100 down to /10.
Opinion: ebooks > physical. I have poor vision and basically no night vision, so the only way I can read physical books is under a lot of light. Plus, the text is often too small-I prefer sans serif fonts-and causes me eye strain and distortion. Audible books are fine, but often I can’t focus, haha! With ebooks, I can adjust text size, contrast, and device brightness. ☺️
I love how there are so many different ways to read and enjoy books nowadays. All the mediums are valid and every time I hear someone talk about how a specific one has helped them enhance their reading experience I feel so happy
@@yasminnn8 Agreed. I love how many different mediums there are for reading nowadays that help more people to get to enjoy books. 💜
"I will break your spines"
"I want people to die"
Merphy Napier 2021
😅
😂
I completely agree with the Sanderson take-but I think a needed counter-statement is that it's impressive in its own right. There are plenty of authors who are more skilled at penning prose, developing characters, or worlds but only put out 1/5-1/10 the volume that Sanderson ever has that you just need to appreciate the sheer professional capability of Sanderson. If the book writing world were anything like how television is, I feel Sanderson would be an absolutely AMAZING producer... and we're all a bit worse off that this reality will never come to pass.
In fact, the only author working today I could say that is both more consistent and more skilled than Sanderson is [g]Oda.
Don't forget he also teaches a writing class, has a weekly podcast, attends cons and spends time with his friends and family.
Criticize the man all you want, he is one of the best selling authors of all time, and is still pumping out books left right and center. Im not the biggest Stephan King fan, but I have mad respect for his work ethic, same with Sanderson. They have earned their success.
Pretty much all of Tolkien's work is very slow and meandering. That being said, if tomorrow they discovered another 2000 pages of story for his world hidden in an old trunk somewhere, sign me up. I'm happy to live in Tolkien's world while he weaves stories around me for as long as possible. There's never been a better worldbuilder, period.
That's how I feel. I got excited for every new bit that Christopher Tolkien compiled and edited, and felt a little sad when he announced that The Fall of Gondolin was to be the last. He's just my comfort read lol
Slow and meandering is a very bad description. It misses just about everything of what makes him distinct and focuses on some subjective stuff or concerns. "Slow and meandering" is clearly an extremely plot-focused statement that fits so many writers, however it ignores how Tolkien is exactly different from most writers. In other words, in a good and proper understanding, it doesn't even apply (in a serious sense).
This is just me quickly reacting to a comment so shallow I would hardly have expected it, though I guess I should nowadays.
@@cerevor I love Tolkien's work, I think my comment made that clear. However, his story pacing seems much slower to me than others I've read. My point was that it doesn't matter, because I'm just down to hang out in his world, no matter how slow, because its so immersive.
If you don't like the descriptors I picked, thats fine, but you don't have to be an arrogant pseudo intellectual blow hard about it. We're all really impressed ok, take the rest of the night off.
Thank you for helping me understand why I don't like Tolkein. I have tried reading LOTR a few times and could never finish. I wanted to like them, but just couldn't. They are slow and meandering, not my style. I'm more if a "just give me the story" kind of person lol
I love listening to an audio book WHILE reading the physical book. Otherwise I’ll be lost and zone out. And also it’s so nice to be able to put it on 2x. You read faster but you also understand what you’re reading. Irl maybe it’s because I’m a very slow reader and I sometimes bore myself with my slowness.
As far as watching movies before reading the books goes. Well, I watched all the Harry Potter movies before reading any of the books. Getting into the books was like experiencing the entire thing for the first time again. I'm so happy I experienced it that way. Personally it's better when I loved a movie and discover it was based on a book.
Same with Game of Thrones
Agreed!
This happens to me with horrible adaptations too especially if I there is a cliffhanger that intrigues me. For eg: I was curious about percy Jackson after the sea of monsters cliffhanger. Then I discovered the books. Right from the first page I fell in love with Percy.
Same with Avatar the Last Airbender I just found the concept really intriguing so I searched about it and found the series. I have probably watched it a hundred times now. 🙈
@@devpriyagoel yeah, Percy Jackson is another one in which the books were such a great experience. Avatar the last airbender is meant to be watched a 100 times 😁
I'm a fan of book before movie because the book will always have way more detail and worldbuilding that the movie can't fit in, either for time, or just because it's harder to world build in the medium of filmmaking. By going book first, you have all the details of the world, so when the story has to cut some parts out for time, even if it makes the story shallow or confusing, you at least will still be able to follow it, because you already have those details.
I also prefer visualizing the characters and world in my head first, then seeing how close the movie is, rather than trying to read a book with a bunch of visuals already stuck in my head for the story from the films.
I watched the first HP movie at a party and promptly forgot the name because I'm that person, but I loved it. So the next day I described this super cool movie to my parents and I can still see the shocked looks on their faces when they realized they had just kind of forgotten to tell me that Harry Potter existed. Devoured the first 4 books (all that were published at the time) within the next 3 days lol
On the "reading one genre doesnt make you smarter" and your point about romance books - like you said, romance can explore other themes and really dark themes, and I love that, but in my opinion exploring the concept of love and romance and partnership is absolutely a deep theme in itself. Romantic relationships are present in everyone's lives (even if one isn't in a romantic relationship themselves, they're surrounded by them in society) and often reflect how we function individually, with other individuals, and in society as a whole. Love as a concept is infinitely interesting because it is so hard to singularly define, and can be explored in so many ways. Reading romance books can help readers explore their own relationships, their sexualities, their response to love, and so much more. People look down on romance because it is perceived as light, fluffy, or just sexy, but a theme or genre being near universal and easy to identify with does not make it vapid or empty of intelligent discussion, introspection, and value.
I actually increasingly agree with the original hot take. You're pointing out all these interesting ideas, that I've never seen explored because I haven't read many romance books, and the romance in epic fantasy feels perfunctory. So if I don't read romance I won't really have the opportunity to see these kinds of things.
@@somerandomnoob100 I suppose it depends on why you read. Personally, I read predominantly for entertainment. I rarely read thrillers or horror, because I just don't enjoy those genres. Learning from reading is definitely a plus, but I don't understand why one would only read so they can be smarter. It's down to the individual I guess
@@somerandomnoob100 I think a more accurate take would be “reading one genre doesn’t make you more worldly”. If you only read one genre, you won’t be exposed to as much as if you read a wide variety, but you’re still learning and activating the parts of your brain you wouldn’t otherwise. It makes you smarter, but it doesn’t make you more experienced or as smart as you would be if you read different genres.
Resurrection tropes makes sense to me when they are part of the overarching theme of a book or series. Yes, it obviously makes sense if it's literally a Christian allegory like Aslan, but if the author is established again and again this idea that say love is the purpose of life or that evil never truly dies or something else builds up a reason why a character could be resurrected... Then I get it. This can still be done really sloppily, but I think occasionally it might work
For certain types of magical creatures it makes more sense too. Like vampires - rising from the grave is there whole thing!
Branden Sanderson- Happy Stephen King
Robert Jordan-Gucci Tolkien
Stephen Eriksson-D&D Joseph Conrad
George RR Martin-Articulate Jabba The Hut
Shadow and Bone's biggest crime was having no map at the start.
Got the same feeling when i started the blade itself
I also love maps in books! Checking the map throughout the story is so helpful.
12:45 - Super agree. For me, if I want to experience more time with the characters, I'll just read it again. This goes for video games and movies, too. The experiences that feel really tight and engaging the whole way (that doesn't mean wall-to-wall action BTW) are the ones I return to over and over again. With the really bloated things, I may enjoy the extra time meandering with the characters on my first time through, but I'm less likely to ever want to pick it up again.
I also don't understand how a out-of-100 system results in anything other than scoring that over time begins to feel kind of arbitrary. Like a 10 or even 5 point scale is enough that I understand if you like the thing or not and after that if I need to go more granular I'll listen to the actual opinion of the reviewer. And tier lists are better suited for comparisons with other similar books (or other media) than numerical scales are.
Regarding decimals: it's the grading system we have in school where I live, so I would naturally gravitate to it.
Happy endings provide a sense of hope. Hope elicits a positive outlook. I'm a fan of happy endings.
I feel the same way about tracking my reading progress. All the apps feel like a chore. Reading specific journals always have sections I find completely useless. The thing that works best for me it just a small notebook to write down title and author and maybe a few details just so I don't forget what I have read. Normally that is enough to jog my memory. I also talk with one of my bffs weekly about books we have read.
I love maps in books! I can’t even begin to express how excited I was when I bought way of kings and it had a MAP WITH COLORS at the front
I love how you are the counter gate keeping. You just really want people to enjoy literature with no prejudice whatsoever. You are a kind soul, thank you for being this way :)
I will say, if you love prose I can understand finding Sanderson to be a little lacking, compared to HG Wells or Tolkien it is very weak in that department. But in my opinion there are strong and weak parts of every writer, Sanderson has many strengths in areas that the more highbrow kind of reader and critic finds less important, but I love him for his strengths.
As a self-confessed prose snob I have to totally agree!! From what I've read of his work, Sanderson's straightforward writing style just doesn't create enough atmosphere or tension to really immerse me in the story. The man sure knows how to structure and pace a story though so when his books get adapted to other media, we'll be in for a treat!
@@Simon-me1jl as someone that couldn't care less about the prose and considering too that english is not my first language, I adore Sanderson's direct style and it's perfect to totally inmerse me in the complicated worlds he creates. With so many weird things, if he started making weird metaphors I would not know if what he just explained is literally there or just something similar. I think his style is perfect to highlight his strengths :)
@@laiaal.3324 old comment, I know. Just wanted to say I don’t mind a slightly more direct style. I get tired of overly “flowery” description that lingers for pages. Obviously that’s only one element of the prose but I find Sanderson to be pretty good at nudging your imagination in the right direction without so many words.
the lotr map helped me to keep up w the story so much!
I love maps too! Also refer to map frequently, and Daniel is a goblin- see Sean Aston video for proof
A fantasy book that doesn't have a map in the front is heresy.
Call me a masochist, but I'm still looking for a book in which half of the story is just main characters kicking ass so I have a false sense of certainty they will never be killed and then proceed to utterly butcher them one by one on the other half like it's the ending of Invinsible's first episode.
Read Berserk.
Have you seen "Predator", with Arnold Schwarzenegger?
I would say the Dresden Files is a good series for you if you already haven't read it.
I feel like this is a spoiler for the book since ur looking for alot of characters dying but the witcher series
Read Chainsaw Man
Bruhh I'm reading Way of Kings now, and I'm constantly referencing the map to see where characters come from. That one hurts.
A few things:
I wish maps in fantasy books were flip outs or like a bookmark so you can just have it on hand and not flip all over for it.
I also totally got the octunnumi because of the cover.
New books feel great, but the purpose of a book is to be loved. The more dog ears, annotations, broken spines etc. the more a book has been read and enjoyed. That being said, I hate people who write IN the book because then its distracting.
And I do mostly ebooks because there are a lot of books I don't know if I want to buy and have on my shelves. I like being able to look at my bookshelf full of beloved books and also being able to recommend or loan those out to friends. So yeah I'll buy a book twice sometimes.
Maps!!! Same! Love them! I look for maps, and love to pore over them before starting the story, and I absolutely flip back and forth and back and forth, following the characters through the lands as they travel.
Oh now I would love to see a video about the best final books in a series!
SAME with the maps!! Love a good map in a book. I always have to go back and refer to it when characters move. And I love referencing a map in a later book in a series to see how much of it has already been traversed, gaining expectations as to where the characters will go in the newest book.
I think it would be nice if the books also put images to help poor souls like me better visualize the characters and locations.
Same, i always end up having them be a random assortment of people and characters that their description vaguely reminded me of but they then include real celebrities, live action characters and animated characters all just chilling.
That’s why I love light novels.
Some people like to have books be pristine always, part of an beautiful collection, while others prefer to be fully engaged in their books to fully enjoy them with no worries about what it looks like. And both are valid and just right.
I enjoy watching an adaptation first so that when I read the book I can separate them and enjoy/dislike them on their own. I’ve found that if I read the story first I’m too fixated on any changes made that I end up, almost always, hating the adaptation. Howl’s Moving Castle is what got me to realize if I watch an adaptation first I can end up loving both, if I had read the book first I would have hated the movie but because I watched the movie first they both ended up being one of my favorite movies/books respectively.
10:00 - It is a general misconception that some people have in our time. They think that being anti-men means pro-women, or anti-white means pro-black, when in reality it's just the other side of the same coin.
You can't be anti sexist by being a sexist to the _bad_ gender, or anti racist by being a racist to the _bad_ race.
100% agree with you
This is true. It actively works against there movement.
I actually do agree with watching the adaptation first and then reading a book. I’ve done that many times it makes me more able to put faces to names and locations a more accurate picture!
maps are awesome... i even have some map making software to make my own... they show you where everything is...
Re: Resurrections
One of my favorite examples of resurrection working in books is the book Jhereg. In that world, resurrection is physically actually fairly easy, provided your body isn't too messed up and you're found within a few days. Crime lords will use death as a warning; "Next time, you won't be brought back." That kind of thing.
But also, and this is the part I find the most interesting, not everybody has access to resurrection because of the financial cost. You can be stabbed to death and up and walking about in a couple of days provided you have enough money or if you have a wealthy patron. I think bringing class into it really makes it adds back in at least some of the tension that lesser stories lose by having resurrection as an option.
I love the maps too, I usually spend at least a minute looking over them before starting the book. Then frequently refer to it as the characters are traveling around or mentioning locations.
Honestly, I think Sanderson got me into Fantasy again as an adult. thanks to your recommendation I started buying books again and started from Mistborn, followed by the Stormlight archive, the second Mistborn era, the Arcanum, and the Skyward books are on the way. I pretty much loved everything I read from him.
And that opened the gates and got me to buy the Gentlemen bastards books, the First Law trilogy, the Expanse books and more good books.
I always would have said I prefer to read the book before I watch its adaptation, but recently I've found that the stories I see first on screen and then read tend to be the ones where I feel the most satisfied with both versions. I get to enjoy the adaptation in its own right without comparing it to the book and inevitably feeling disappointed, and then I get to see what inspired the adaptation in the first place and all the details that didn't make it into the movie or show. If there is a story where I really don't want to be robbed of experiencing it fully in book format for the first time, then I will still read the book first, but for the most part I think watching the adaptation first makes it easier to appreciate both versions more fully. Great video!
"The smell of used books isn't as satisfying as the taste of used books."
This was my submission. TELL ME I'M WRONG, UA-cam.
WORDS ARE DELICIOUS
Do u eat the papers?
Taste is like 90% smell, anyways.
I use maps and any other reference material often when reading. It helped a ton when I was getting into A Song of Ice and Fire. I always want maps and character references, especially if there’s a lot of similar sounding names and places.
I love maps at the start of books! They make the book world so much more real :)
i had forgotten about this channel. it came up on my home page. i'm three videos in and my ribs hurt from laughter.
i laughed at your reactions, how you stay positive even at the most outrageous of hottakes, but then... the add. i'm dying. lol
Here's a hot take:
Hot takes are underrated. Listening to people's varied opinions on different subjects is a lot more fascinating than we'd like to admit.
Ooo hearing you say you have discovered authors which may better suit your tastes (even though you still live Sanderson books) has me excited to see your updated favorite authors and series list at the end of the year! Also I love maps too and am right there with you!
I actually think it is becoming more common the dark, not so happy endings. I find myself looking for something with a happy ending now
I would like to thank you for actually giving references for the idea of this video! So many claim originality of ripped off ideas on YT. Thank you for setting a great standard!
I picked up The Wheel Of Time because of the minimalist black covers sporting the WoT logo, and the fact that they were freaking massive books. So yeah, I judge a book by its cover and its size; possibly because that decision was maybe the best book buying decision I ever made.
Also, what made me pick up that series, is that all the books had matching branding and would look good on my shelf. So if a series matches, then I WILL get sucked in, even if I'm not that interested in it.
I have bought one book exclusively because I fell in love with the cover. It's called 'De verdovers' by Anna Enquist. The cover is black with in the middle a photograph of a sleeping swan, with its head tucked away under its wing so it is the shape of a drop. Great book, amazing cover
I actually watched the Lord of the Rings movies before reading the books and found it super helpful to orient myself because I would recognize a line from the movie and go 'oh, that's where I am!' I often found the books really disorienting at times because there was so much deleted stuff and having watched the movies first was really useful for me to follow along with the books
I am just the same with maps, I love to know where characters are and how their location relates to the rest of the word. Maps of cities don't do as much for me, but when a character says "we need to go to country B!" and I can check the map and think damn that's far and then another character will say "but that's a 3 week ride!" that makes me happy. Idk why
The longer the story, the merrier ! I only look at book over 500 pages and almost never stand alone, I’m in need of big book in big series 🥰
Yeah, honestly I think that long-running series, whether it's TV, books, movies, etc., are underrated. I understand that they're a much larger commitment but you can get so much more depth in the story, characters, world, etc., that to me it's worth it. Most of my favorite books and TV are longer than average.
You changed my mind on how I should look at the map in the beginning of a book! While I have looked at them, I should “study them” and track the progress.
I think maps are good measuring stick on how deep the world building and how epic the story will be on the book
I agree with the bittersweet endings! If a book ends in a completely happy way, it might make me happy. But if it ends bittersweet, it's much more likely to be one of my top books.
I loved Daniel's livestream yesterday where Joe Ambercrombie explained he does not put maps at the beginning of the book specifically because he knows some readers use them like Merphy. Sometimes a writer doesn't want you to stop reading to look at a map. Authors have to think about every single thing they put in the books, it's fascinating.
But… that’s the best part and part of the immersion!
I saw something on Facebook or somewhere else that I am absolutely going to steal and use if I ever publish my works. It was a fold-out map. It sits at the back of the book and you just unfold it whenever you read so you can just glance over to see the place and then go back to reading.
@@valathor95 I agree. I loooove maps too but if the author wants "me" to experience the book a certain way, I respect that.
I exclusively use good reads as a place to keep a list of the books I want to read. When I hear a book tuber or a friend recommend a book I’ll pull out my phone, read a couple quick review on Good Reads and add it to my “Want to Read” list. For that propose I think it’s great.
My Unpopular Opinions I guess lol
i couldn't care less if a book uses a well known trope like the ressurection trope, the chosen one trope, or lost royal trope. In fact, I love them lol.
And I will honestly read the same story ten thousand times over in a different cover. I love original stories, but I also don't care if I already have read ten books like the new one I've picked up. It actually makes me happy and comfortable when I can see everything coming. I can't usually see things coming in original stories because I'm a little bit of a dumb dumb. (I admit that sometimes in original, fresh stories I sometimes skip to the middle and the ending and read a couple pages just so I know something that will happen and can try to predict things around it.)
YA books can be very shallow and similar but that doesn't make them objectively bad.
People put too much value in morally grey characters who aren't grey so much as very close to evil or just terrible. I feel like that's almost as unrealistic as a completely good character. Of course there are exceptions but irl, i don't think that's the rule. I'd love to read more characters closer to the middle on morality.
The BEST Way to remember your place in a book is to slam the book shut and pretend you remember the page, then when you come back flip through spoilers and things you've already read to find your exact place. Or, alternatively, just psychically open to the exact right page.
I hard agree with your opinions on "morally grey" characters. Didn't realize that was an opinion I had until your comment.
totally totally agree! I love a character that tries to be good, but is flawed or makes bad decisions in the moment, but characters that are just slightly less evil then the antagonist are so overrated. I like a main character who is trying to do improve the world they are in. As far as original stories vs tropes give me tropes every time. I get why people hav a problem with "chosen ones" but just because your main character is the one that saves the day doesnt mean they are a chosen one. I mean if it was a historic event and you wanted to tell the story of what happened you would focus on the person/people that had the biggest impact on the outcome. So why, if telling about a huge conflict, would you not focus on the character that decides the outcome?
I like the Lost Royal trope, full stop.
Chosen Ones can be done EXTREMELY well if the status isn't just good and there's no guarentee of success.
Resurrection can work if the character was 'dead' before the plot started or if it's a comedy or an established thing.
"people put too much value in morally grey characters who aren't grey so much as very close to evil or just terrible."
exactly how i feel about severus snape. just because he wanted to get back at magic hitler doesn't mean he was a good person. he was constantly disregarding lily's feelings even before calling her a slur, joined the magic nazis because he wanted to, asked for lily's husband and child to be killed and then literally abused that son along with countless other children for no reason other than the fact that he was spiteful his own fucking actions had consequences.
sorry if this was too much, i have very strong feelings about this lol
I agree with you on covers, I mainly buy used and mostly pulp paperbacks where the blurb and cover are all you can base the decision on, so I have a stack of pulp sci-fi/fantasy novels to read all with kickass retro covers that I bought and will read because they look cool
* people criticising Sanderson *
me: Ok, i get that.
* people criticising Tolkien *
me: I see, i guess you have a different taste on books.
* people criticising Oda *
me: LISTEN HERE YOU LIL SHI. . .
Lol
You just spoke to all my friends right now.
@RAYHAN REHEMA PUTRA no man, its a joke.
Who is oda?
The knife of never letting go was a trilogy and had a brilliant ending.
This is such a fantasy oriented channel.
Hot take: the romances should have a happy ending is such an American take.
I discovered it for the first time when online and it shocked me? In the romance section on my country it's not uncommon to have books with bad or bittersweet endings, actually the most famous historical romantic story in my country ends with one of the persons being murdered.
And then I moved to China, and there you have a 50/50 on picking a random romance book and it having a happy ending.
So I'm always surprised when I'm discussing books online and it gets to a point where I hear "if it doesn't have a happy ending it's NOT romance!!"
Lol I've read some wonderful romances with no HEA. However, the "women's fiction" genre seems to be where the non-HEA romances go now which I avoid because I know it won't be a happy ending ahead of time. The genre is literally a spoiler for me.
If there is no HEA I don't want to know. If I know, I won't get attached to the characters out of fear of being devastated.
It’s easier to give video games or reading then books because you can tell them if they should buy rent or skip them and it’s easier to avoid spoilers
Only time I was glad I saw an adaptation first was The Witcher. The Last Wish would have been a DNF if I didn't already know how that mess interconnected already. I have thoroughly enjoyed the next 4 books so far so I'm glad I had the show to help me trudge through that first book.
Just curious, why did you think The Last Wish was a mess? From what I remember it's just a collection of short stories that aren't even really connected right? So why would you call 5 short seperate adventures of Geralt "a mess"? I'd understand if you called the later books a mess but why the first one?
@@tommy_svk they are out of chronological order which isn't usually my fav. Plus at the beginning of each short story is a snippet of another story. So the format is: here's is 1/7 of a story, now here's a different story, now here's another 1/7 of that story, now here's a different story, etc. I just found it annoying and confusing. I will say that I was listening to the audiobook for it which I don't think helped for this particular book. I feel like I would have been less confused reading it physically. I have sense re-read it in chronological order and read the 1-7 snippets all together as well. Helped my comprehension a ton.
@@kimbeverly8960 I see. The stories are out of order but it literally doesn't matter since they're not connected. You can read them in whatever order you want and they still make sense. I can see the inbetween story being confusing for some people though, even though I had no troubles with it. It's just a book about Geralt relaxing in this place and having flashbacks about his previous adventures, pretty simple. But I get that it could confuse you, the audiobooks were definitely the biggest factor in this.
3:14 me too! I study the maps before I start the book, and notice things on it! And I will often interrupt the story to stare at the map more to know where the characters are. I love a well-drawn, detailed map. I want all my fantasy books set in other worlds to have maps! I love maps!
the problem i have with those "feminist" books that just have mean/bully leads.. if the roles were reversed, boy would that incur a shitstorm of epic proportions, for being so misogynistic...i dont like the double standard
the funny thing about Stephen King,.. in my opini0on,.. is that his books under his psydonym of Richard Bachman are all way superior to his normal books.
i agree with the "you dont need to kill your characters to have an impactfull story" opinion,.. BUT their actions/decisions NEED to have consequences..
and that is my problem with all the superhero stories,.. if you think about it, nothing happens, no consequences to any actions,.. and if someone is killed, he comes back some time later,...
I agree, they don't necessarily need to die but if none of the characters fuck up in a major way that has lasting consequences then I'm not usually interested if it's a long series.
It's unrealistic how many main characters don't hugely fuck up and realise they're in the wrong
Sanderson is a bit too much of high fantasy for me, incredibile high fantasy, but I like something closer to earth
I don’t judge anyone for the method of their reading. I personally cannot keep my attention on an audiobook because I space out for large chunks of it. A very small part of it is the narrator, but in general my audio processing is just trash and I start thinking about other things. It’s so bad but I want audiobooks to work for me so badly. They just don’t 😩
Omg so true... I tried listening to audio books, but I just couldn't keep up. I thought I was the only one who spaces out. Somehow, I just don't connect with audio books and don't feel satisfied after reading an eBook. I feel terrible that I only enjoy physical books.
Why would you not like a map? It’s so nice to see how far or close the places they go to are, it gives you a sense of time and space.
"Samwise didn't want to help people"
Well duh, everyone cares about saving the world mostly because they love someone in it. No one wants to willingly run in such danger for the sake of a bunch of strangers, unless you are Jesus Christ or some shallow anime maiden
Or unless you are a Saiyan in Dragon Ball Z/S
Technically he indirectly wanted to help save people because he is a good friend and wanted to help Frodo and share his burden of the ring.
And that is what makes him a great character.
I mean, some people do- Doctors Without Borders is a thing for example.
@@curranfrank2854 yes, but those doctors are not the average gardner minding his own business thrown upside down abruptly out of home. Usually the characters that go save the world don't live for the mission to save people, because readers recognize themselves more in the average guy being there by chance
@@lapersianaperta Yeah that's fair
I tried Locke Lamora because you hyped it up so much and I think ITS SO GOOD. Locke and Jean’s friendship is just chef’s kiss and their thievery is just so fascinating and always ends differently than I expect.