Sanderson better then Tolkien

[bdoble97]

I'm not positive we're to put this post. But after finishing Wind and Truth and almost all of the cosmere books. The over all cosmere story is better then Middel earth in my opinion.  Also how many years did it tak Tolkien to write The Hobbit and Lord of the rings. Brandon Sanderson has written 20 some thing cosmere books and other books along with short stories outside of the Cosmere. Tolkien is the father of epic fansty but Sanderson has become the king of epic fansty. Tolkien did create many languages and people didn't help him like Sanderson has people help him with further understanding people with disabilities but to me that just makes him a better written and story teller. He has taken the opportunity of getting first hand knowledge from people to try to fully understand what  people ho through to help make his stories that much better.  Thanks for reading

[Treamayne]

I think the answer to this question and is entirely subjective to what a person looks for in stories. 

For example, to me, Tolkien does not even make my top 10 list.

I recognize the great contribution Tolkein, Lewis, Wells, Verne, Asimov, etc. have made to speculative fiction - the macro and sub genres would not exist today without their efforts (even if both Sci Fi and Fantasy go back to antiquity - the defined genres rest firmly on these works and authors' shoulders). 

Just like Scientific progress - could Newton have made strides in the Laws of Motion without the work of mathematicians and physicists that preceded him? No. Would we have the current Cosmere without the works of Tolkien and Asimov? No. Is Sanderson a better storyteller? Subjective yes. 

If you want 90 lbs of background material for a 2 lb story - Tolkein is that. If you want wide arrays of stories across Millennia of in-world time that, somehow, all come together to a cohesive whole in the last 3 books? Asimov is that (and a major Cosmere inspiration). 

Brandon borrows from both, and does those things better than either one could - but he does not do all that those two have done; thereby making any direct comparisons fallacious in any context other than personal preference. 

Hope that helps

Edited March 18, 2025 by Treamayne
SPAG

[RefusesToElaborate]

1 hour ago, bdoble97 said:

I'm not positive we're to put this post. But after finishing Wind and Truth and almost all of the cosmere books. The over all cosmere story is better then Middel earth in my opinion.  Also how many years did it tak Tolkien to write The Hobbit and Lord of the rings. Brandon Sanderson has written 20 some thing cosmere books and other books along with short stories outside of the Cosmere. Tolkien is the father of epic fansty but Sanderson has become the king of epic fansty. Tolkien did create many languages and people didn't help him like Sanderson has people help him with further understanding people with disabilities but to me that just makes him a better written and story teller. He has taken the opportunity of getting first hand knowledge from people to try to fully understand what  people ho through to help make his stories that much better.  Thanks for reading

Better in what regard?

Worldbuilding? Tolkein constructed several languages for the sake of making his poetry better in universe. Despite already being an accomplished poet in English. At that point you're not worldbuilding for the world anymore. You're in it for love of the game.

Prose? Tolkein has arguably every other fantasy writer beat. (Though, I will hear arguments between Tolkein and Terry Pratchett having better prose.)

There are some aspects of Sandersons writing I prefer. Tolkein let a few characters just outright die on the grapevine, like Aragorn not really having a character arc and just being arguably a secondary aspect of Theodens character arc. But I won't call him better.

[bdoble97]

18 minutes ago, RefusesToElaborate said:

Better in what regard?

Worldbuilding? Tolkein constructed several languages for the sake of making his poetry better in universe. Despite already being an accomplished poet in English. At that point you're not worldbuilding for the world anymore. You're in it for love of the game.

Prose? Tolkein has arguably every other fantasy writer beat. (Though, I will hear arguments between Tolkein and Terry Pratchett having better prose.)

There are some aspects of Sandersons writing I prefer. Tolkein let a few characters just outright die on the grapevine, like Aragorn not really having a character arc and just being arguably a secondary aspect of Theodens character arc. But I won't call him better.

You are much better at articulating your self then I am. I would say that Sanderson over all story telling is better and is much more involved with many more characters that have more indepth stories. 20 pluse cosmere books to the Hobbit Lord of the Rings and then the Silmarillion. I would say Tolkien had alot of ideas and characters but never fleshed them out like Sanderson has been able to sofar. I have read Lord of the rings 3 or 4 times in the past 20 years and none of of the characters hit like Kaladin does for me. 

[bdoble97]

2 hours ago, Treamayne said:

I think the answer to this question and is entirely subjective to what a person looks for in stories. 

For example, to me, Tolkien does not even make my top 10 list.

I recognize the great contribution Tolkein, Lewis, Wells, Verne, Asimov, etc. have made to speculative fiction - the macro and sub genres would not exist today without their efforts (even if both Sci Fi and Fantasy go back to antiquity - the defined genres rest firmly on these works and authors' shoulders). 

Just like Scientific progress - could Newton have made strides in the Laws of Motion without the work of mathematicians and physicists that preceded him? No. Would we have the current Cosmere without the works of Tolkien and Asimov? No. Is Sanderson a better storyteller? Subjective yes. 

If you want 90 lbs of background material for a 2 lb story - Tolkein is that. If you want wide arrays of stories across Millennia of in-world time that, somehow, all come together to a cohesive whole in the last 3 books? Asimov is that (and a major Cosmere inspiration). 

Brandon borrows from both, and does those things better than either one could - but he does not do all that those two have done; thereby making an direct comparisons fallacious in any context other than personal preference. 

Hope that helps

Such great points. I read Asimov for the first time two years my grandmother was telling how amazing he was. I just felt underwhelmed. I guess i a better way for me to explain myself is Tolkien and Asimov are Bobby Orr and Wayne Gretzy and Sanderson is Conor Mcdavid 

[ChillPenguin]

23 hours ago, bdoble97 said:

Such great points. I read Asimov for the first time two years my grandmother was telling how amazing he was. I just felt underwhelmed. I guess i a better way for me to explain myself is Tolkien and Asimov are Bobby Orr and Wayne Gretzy and Sanderson is Conor Mcdavid 

I just read all of Azimov’s main works in the past 16 months (17 books). They aren’t all created equal and part of it is the way he went about writing it. The first 3 Foundation novels are arguably his best and were written as  serial short stories, his best style. He didn’t really plan that all out, wrote the middle books randomly and tied them together with the last Foundation books only at urging from others. There are many SciFi books that are better but I am glad to have read them. As with Asimov, Tolkien was a modern literary pioneer. I wouldn’t be reading Sanderson if I hadn’t been excited by Tolkien in my youth. Both of these authors are burdened by writing in an era that was culturally different than now - for example female protagonists are hard to find.

Sanderson, on the other hand, has this large outline of everything, for which we have only seen a portion of it. He’s very prolific and I do love his stories! I agree that Sanderson has learned from those that came before him. You would want those that come later to be improved in some way. Does Sanderson do everything better? I dare say no, but a better overall writer? For at least Asimov I say yes. It’s been too long since I’ve read Tolkien to judge there. 

[bdoble97]

1 hour ago, ChillPenguin said:

I just read all of Azimov’s main works in the past 16 months (17 books). They aren’t all created equal and part of it is the way he went about writing it. The first 3 Foundation novels are arguably his best and were written as  serial short stories, his best style. He didn’t really plan that all out, wrote the middle books randomly and tied them together with the last Foundation books only at urging from others. There are many SciFi books that are better but I am glad to have read them. As with Asimov, Tolkien was a modern literary pioneer. I wouldn’t be reading Sanderson if I hadn’t been excited by Tolkien in my youth. Both of these authors are burdened by writing in an era that was culturally different than now - for example female protagonists are hard to find.

Sanderson, on the other hand, has this large outline of everything, for which we have only seen a portion of it. He’s very prolific and I do love his stories! I agree that Sanderson has learned from those that came before him. You would want those that come later to be improved in some way. Does Sanderson do everything better? I dare say no, but a better overall writer? For at least Asimov I say yes. It’s been too long since I’ve read Tolkien to judge there. 

Have you listened/watch any of Asomov old interviews on YouTube they are excellent. I guess for me Sanderson is my favorite out of the three and he is becoming my favorite author 

[Forts Board]

eh, I still think Tolkien is the goat. Sando is great though. 

[AlmightyGir]

On 2/21/2025 at 4:51 PM, Treamayne said:

I think the answer to this question and is entirely subjective to what a person looks for in stories. 

For example, to me, Tolkien does not even make my top 10 list.

I recognize the great contribution Tolkein, Lewis, Wells, Verne, Asimov, etc. have made to speculative fiction - the macro and sub genres would not exist today without their efforts (even if both Sci Fi and Fantasy go back to antiquity - the defined genres rest firmly on these works and authors' shoulders). 

Just like Scientific progress - could Newton have made strides in the Laws of Motion without the work of mathematicians and physicists that preceded him? No. Would we have the current Cosmere without the works of Tolkien and Asimov? No. Is Sanderson a better storyteller? Subjective yes. 

If you want 90 lbs of background material for a 2 lb story - Tolkein is that. If you want wide arrays of stories across Millennia of in-world time that, somehow, all come together to a cohesive whole in the last 3 books? Asimov is that (and a major Cosmere inspiration). 

Brandon borrows from both, and does those things better than either one could - but he does not do all that those two have done; thereby making an direct comparisons fallacious in any context other than personal preference. 

Hope that helps

Great points all round!

To add my £0.02 to the thread... Sanderson is my favourite writer, but not because of his writing style. More, I'm just really enjoying the content, and the storys he is telling.

In terms of if he's a better writer? It depends by what metric you're talking about. He's certainly the most prolific fantasy author of all time. I don't think his writing is as good as GRRM, but he beats GRRM because, well... He storming finishes his books. Like, could you imagine if GRRM wrote at an even half-decent pace?

The reason I say this about Sanderson, and I don't mean this to be disparaging at all, is because it's obvious to me that he has a formula, and it works, and people like it, so he keeps doing it. But he hasn't really done anything to break the typical Heroes Journey mold that most fantasy seems to follow. In fact, Kaladin, Vin... The main protagonists of most of the Cosmere fit the Heroes Journey mold so well that while the specific details of Kaladin's rise, fall, and then rise again might not have been obvious, the overall journey from WoK to the end of WoR was entirely predictable.

But, that's honestly part of the reason the writing is so enjoyable, I suppose. It doesn't try to pretend to be something it's not. It's good old fashioned good vs evil, small man rise up, save the world fantasy writing. And that's dope. I'm just glad Sanderson is able to pump this stuff out fast enough

[Mattel]

ThE hErEsY!!!!!

I love Brandon Sanderson and he is an amazing author, but Tolkien's writing is too impressive to surpass by a lot of people.

If you just study like a few paragraphs of text from the first few chapters, you will be amazed. There is almost never a single part in the trilogy that gives off vibes of I think Tolkien just was writing. Everything he does is purposeful.

I also think there is a tad more depth to Tolkien's writing. Tolkien was a medieval scholar and the medieval ages had some of the most deep and vibrant literature, theology, philosophy, and ideas. You can find things in LotR that connection to Boethius, Dante, Augustine, etc.

There is also more depth in how Tolkien wrote a myth, and Sanderson writes stories. Myths are stories that are just True. It doesn't mean the facts of the story have to be true, just that the story itself that it tells, is True. 

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love Sanderson and how relatable and wise and amazing it is.

I just think Tolkien created something that can (and should be jk) loved by everyone, and will stand the test of time. I hope all of Sanderson's writing will achieve this, but it might not.

[Lord Ruler Sylphrena He/Him]

Its hard to say which is better. Both have excellent plot. Both have excellent worldbuilding but have focused their attention in different areas (Sanderson has best Ecology, Tolkien has best Linguistics). I'd say Sanderson writes more dynamic stories and the fact that he has written way more gives him some points. Still many of the highs of LOTR eclipse the highs of SA also LOTR is done and the Cosmere is still in development so its hard to judge at this point. Things for Brandon could get better or they could get worse. WAT was excellent in my opinion but Lost Metal was probably my first Brandon book I disliked.

At the end of the day the most fair comparison in my eyes is to compare their best characters. It obviously comes down to The Stick vs Tom Bombadil. The Stick's power was so great that it's interlude was removed because the goated line "I am a stick"x100 would have overshadowed the rest of the book. On the other hand Tom Bombadil is probably is the greatest singer in human history. Peter Jackson knew there was nobody that could capture the godly aura he gives off and so had to leave him out. This is truly a battle of titans and I might have to create a poll to see what the Sharders think about this.

[arnau]

come on man you can't be serious

[Rorzikel]

A man cuts a way through the undergrowth, and now others walk down the beaten path quicker than he made it. They make their own offshoots and reach farther because they add from his. They see now where he could have set his course better, made the path straighter.

Was he a fool? No, he just was first.

Edited March 19, 2025 by Rorzikel
added an “a”

[Brgst13]

I think the difference is best explained by a car analogy.  Tolkien is like the 1965 Mustang, where Sanderson is like a 2025 Porsche Carrera.  Is the Porsche better in mechanical aspects?  Mostly yes.  Is it better engineered?  Yes.  But there would be none of these advances without the originator.  Some people appreciate the classics, some prefer a newer car.  Just a matter of taste.

[Nitpicking]

Simple answer: can all of us (I'd bet) read Brandon's stuff more easily and with more in-the-moment enjoyment than the plays of William Shakespeare?

Yes.

Is he a better writer in some absolute sense?

Nope.

[TwinStorm He/Him]

On 3/23/2025 at 5:03 PM, Nitpicking said:

Simple answer: can all of us (I'd bet) read Brandon's stuff more easily and with more in-the-moment enjoyment than the plays of William Shakespeare?

Yes.

Is he a better writer in some absolute sense?

Nope.

exactly

another problem is, when people say Tolkien's not prolific, we've all read most of Sanderson's work, but only really LotR and the hobbit of Tolkien's

he has far more to his name

in addition, Tolkien will last

he already has

Sanderson tho?

hopefully, but doubtful

if anything he'll last through WoT

[Master Silver]

I really enjoy the quantity of Sanderson, but as has been mentioned before, Tolkien's prose in The Lord of the Rings are just better. Part of the issue is that Sanderson's sheer volume lessens the quality of his prose. I also think his volume affects the quality of the story sometimes. Wind and Truth is a prime example of this. I think both Rhythm of War and Wind and Truth were hurt by deadlines. Most readers rank them as the worst of the series. 

 

Someone else mentioned that this is largely subjective and a matter of taste, that is true too. I think The Way of Kings had a chance to be the next LOTR but in my opinion the last two books really brought down the quality of the series. But it isn't like he can retcon them, although I think some fans might be for it if it improved the last two books by 10%

[Treamayne]

49 minutes ago, Master Silver said:

Tolkien's prose in The Lord of the Rings are just better.

I see this sentiment often, and I just don't get it. I like Tolkein for what he did for the Genre, and all four books are staples for a reason. But his prose is not that great. The story is good, and obviously has much more worldbuilding than we see in the books - but the books themselves are . . . good (not Best Prose Ever, and certainly not bad. . . just good).

Separate from the actual Prose, pacing issues, hidden-info issues, and soft magic all detract from those stories for me; which likely makes the prose less impactful, since the story as a whole is less impactful. 

I'm glad I have read them, but I doubt I will ever read them a second or third time. 

57 minutes ago, Master Silver said:

Most readers rank them as the worst of the series.

Also subjective. I put RoW way ahead of Oathbringer, and arguably better than WoR. 

But I'll reiterate what I said above - it comes down to what you like in a story - so it's all subjective and personal preference. 

[Master Silver]

17 minutes ago, Treamayne said:

I see this sentiment often, and I just don't get it. I like Tolkein for what he did for the Genre, and all four books are staples for a reason. But his prose is not that great. The story is good, and obviously has much more worldbuilding than we see in the books - but the books themselves are . . . good (not Best Prose Ever, and certainly not bad. . . just good).

Separate from the actual Prose, pacing issues, hidden-info issues, and soft magic all detract from those stories for me; which likely makes the prose less impactful, since the story as a whole is less impactful. 

I'm glad I have read them, but I doubt I will ever read them a second or third time. 

Also subjective. I put RoW way ahead of Oathbringer, and arguably better than WoR. 

But I'll reiterate what I said above - it comes down to what you like in a story - so it's all subjective and personal preference. 

I get that likes and dislikes are a matter of taste. I think academics, like English PhDs and such would give Tolkien the win on prose. In terms of story, being an old soul, I prefer the age-old themes that Tolkien clearly puts forward in his books. I think there is strength there that endures the test of time. This likely why Way of Kings is my favorite of the series. Cheers

[Nitpicking]

I think I wasn't clear above: Shakespeare was the Brandon Sanderson of pre-wide-literacy England. Everyone knew his name. Other people published stuff pretending to be him. His stuff is difficult for us because we grew up in a different culture ... same as Tolkien's. I don't think too many World War One veterans are reading this.