Some problem visualizing scenes and settings (essential vs. vivid descriptions)

[Lord Stormer]

I've been reading Brandon's works continuously for six months - some of the Cosmere and Skyward's all four. I am a slow and attentive reader who tried to not miss out anything on the pages. The length of the books poses a challenge (I read 20 - 30 pages an hour), but nevertheless it hasn't stop me.

Recently it caught into my mind that apparently Brandon sometimes applied minimal (or only essential) details to events and settings instead of more vivid and concise descriptions. On items, objects, and lifeforms, he's done decent detail, however. I never doubted his worldbuilding, but there are often times that I wished he could invest more words in some areas. While I understand that his prose is akin to "glass" instead of "flowery", it arises some implications for me as a reader. I see that by writing this way, he left much of the visuals to the readers' imaginations instead of taking full command in the first place. He's said that in his lectures, so I think it is intentional.

Back at school I was taught to write imaginatively - with vividness and clarity - and today, I still care about exact detail when possible. While reading the books I had a hard time visualizing events, settings, and especially combat scenes. I am forced to reread pages (sometimes repeatedly) because my OCD won't let me go until I get a flawless grasp on what's happening.

Reading Mistborn I am somewhat unsatisfied with how he described Luthadel. It's just... doesn't feel enough. We have a detailed map of major city, supposedly complex and rich in every corner, but it doesn't project in my mind to what I've expected it to be. Same goes for Roshar, but we have an abundance of illustrations.

Reading combat scenes is my greater issue. Should be an enjoyment but I often struggled. I give you an example: Interlude 9 (between Part 3 and 4) in The Way of Kings, Death Wears White. This is an intense chapter that I read in a loop before ending. Imagining the exact sequences of the fight is challenging.

Here is an excerpt of a scene I also had a problem.

Spoiler

"The imperial soldiers formed a ring, watching warily. Kelsier used them, Pushing against breastplates, lurching himself back and forth in the air. The quick changes in position let him move constantly, disorienting the Inquisitor, allowing him to Push his different flying pieces of metal where he wanted them." The Final Empire, Chapter 34.

Regarding immersion in combat, on one of his old lectures Brandon gave advice to new authors "don't do beat by beat" in these kind of scenes. I agree with that one, but he often just sum up / paraphrase "what essentially happened" in an act, much like in the excerpt above (and much of the chapter's context). There are minimal clues of direction, position, or clues of the surroundings - I have to interpolate it all. Sometimes the spatial descriptions are barely sufficient. Have you ever feel lost, confused, or disoriented during these sorts of scenes? When I feel almost blind to the environment setting, I lost the immersion, and when that happens I must reread the paragraph or the page, which is frustrating.

I have some questions to ask, especially to physical copy readers: Is it just me? I may find my reading mindset to be a bit uncommon though because the majority of you Cosmere readers use audiobooks. If you are one of them, how do you even envisage the story when you speed up the narrator 2.5 times the normal speed? Is visualization a core part of your experience? Do you have any suggestions so I can absorb the text more effectively? Is my desire to understand the story too possessive? Am I reading the wrong way?

[Treamayne]

On 10/29/2024 at 3:16 AM, Lord Stormer said:

Is it just me?. . .  Am I reading the wrong way?

There is no wrong way to read. 

It is not just you.

For example: This Thread - where we made a visual to help understand the Vin/Zane fight at Keep Hasting (and there were still disagreements on how exactly it went down).

Yes, Brandon is big on the idea that each reader's own  interpretation should be valid for that reader. Yes, that means for some of us, we need to go over material more than once to get the mental image to work for us. Over the years, I have been able to train myself to hold-off most of this (but not all) for the re-read. Focusing on broad story in the first reading, and letting the second and subsequent readings focus on detail (both in action scenes and foreshadowing clues).

Not just in Sanderson's work, but in general; as I find the majority of authors I read are similar levels of detail (if not always the same types of details). I've gone so far that I generally use this phenomenon as my personal book metric. I dislike "ratings" so I classify stories I have read on two scales:

• Reading (Didn't finish; Finished - will not reread; Reread Infrequently(-), Reread occassionally , Reread regularly (+)).

• Recommend to others? (No,;Yes, conditional; Yes, Unconditional)

For me, a huge hallmark of a good story is how often I am willing to reread it to solidify these details in my mind. Stories I love and recommend I reread again even after I have gotten the details in my mind straight. Stories that are okay I'll reread once or twice - just enough to understand these details. Stories I did not care for I won't spend the time rereading to understand the details because I am just not invested in the story enough to care. Very rarely is a story in the first/lowest category, where I do not even finish reading it the first time. 

Hope that helps

Edited November 2, 2024 by Treamayne
SPAG