eriwancoselyn

ok great. so, to repeat myself, complexity isn't indicative of quality in characters. idk about the other one... I'd say light's motivations and desires in death note aren't exactly realistic but I find him to be a fun character/ you didn't? idk what I'm supposed to read from this then. but, if you didn't then that's ok. let's get onto the other points, since you don't seem to be taking a hard stance on shallan. what do you think of the pacing?

not to be rude, but it's not that complex of a question, I'll repeat my initial thing. what do you think makes a good character? because I think the reasons you gave for shallan being a good character aren't compelling.

I'm sorry, maybe I misread your comment. when I asked what made a good character, I expected the things you said in your response to be reasons why she was good. what do you think about the rest of my comment?

bruh, you say that like people can't be equally varied on what they choose to praise. there's some degree of personal interpretation in it, even if something more concrete is guiding the underlying dissatisfaction. idk why you are set in this idea that ending on a low point was always going to be a tough sell, words of radiance ended with the release of the everstorm and it's considered to be one of the best books in the series. if you're talking middle of the series specifically, how can you explain the love that empire strikes back gets?

but you realize that a simple character can also be a good character, right? and characters don't just get better the more complex they are. can I ask, is it impossible for a good character to just be written as normally likable? this is what I mean, I want to know what qualities all good characters should have. also, just clarifying, I like shallan too. I'd say she's taken a nosedive in the later books but that's not my biggest issue with the book. I was more just pointing out that nothing in your post made shallan a good character.

before we get started, I just wanted to say that I love your name. Steps into boxing ring. idk why you've mentioned all of this like it's got anything to do with pacing. none of this makes her a good or bad character. if you respond, could you please lay out what you think a good character should be? if I had to sum it up in short, the issue there is glibness. there have always been glib or on the nose things in bs books but it's getting worse. there's also been a shift in the formality with which people speak. this isn't always true, some of the characters have stayed very consistent in voice but it's more a general trend that people point to. ofc the books are translated into English, but there's been a shift between the translation between book 1 and 5. I like empire's ending and don't like this ending. mainly due to the story leading up to the respective endings. dalinar's sacrifice is fine, it's an echo of hero of ages but I don't really mind. it's more the story leading up to it that I have an issue with.

I totally get that you may have thoroughly enjoyed all of those things but your enjoyment is a totally subjective metric. The bar was set by the first two books.

there's been a drop in writing quality. sorry about the terrible capitalization. I've seen a comment above talking about writing so I'm starting here. writing, beyond just modernizing, has gotten quantifiably worse. dialogue, which was generally deep, subtle and thought provoking in book one has slowly mellowed out into bland, generic and uninteresting slop in the later books. not to say that there weren't cringe or on the nose things in book 1, there absolutely were. I notice this, 'but brandon has always had cringe lines in his books' sentiment rising up but it's never made much sense to me. no one is arguing that Brandon has shifted personalities overnight. he's still the same man who wrote the first two books, he's just grown as a writer. the issue is that his writing style has grown like an ingrown toenail, slowly his worst tendencies have gotten the better of his best ones. meaningful character interaction is on the downturn. words of radiance is most notable for this being done right. most of the characters are together and they interact in ways that are meaningful, and thus thrilling to read. characters are actually capable of affecting one another, and that makes you care when something happens. for example, the chasm scene, and shallan / Kaladin's changes within, is the apex of all the books for me. the way that they interact is like a feast for an invested reader who likes and cares about those characters. unfortunately, gone are the days when one main character could meaningfully change another. instead, now, most of the characters exist in their own little mini arcs, isolated from the other characters who are crucial for giving them texture. this is why rhythm of war is so hard to care about. it's not as bad in wind and truth, but it's still very much an issue. deemphasis of character in general. characters are the feeling organs of a reader. if the character doesn't care, the reader won't care. the general trend of plot lines pulling away from characters has been one of the worst changes in the whole of stormlight archive. what I mean is that when shallan and Dalinar are walking around the spiritual realm, the readers don't care because neither of the characters have a real stake in the events we're shown. obv Dalinar has to get through this to find out what happened to honor but he doesn't care about the events themselves, he just wants the outcome. shallan is even worse. not only does she not care about the visions, she doesn't even have a real reason to interact with them. she just bumbles through until she finds mishram, then is promptly sucked out. the reveal of her mother being chana means nothing to her, has no effect on her outlook or her mental state. world building only matters if the characters care. this is why it's so impactful when kaladin takes to the sky for the first time or shallan finds out that the parshmen are the void bringers. the knowledge that someone in this world can fly means nothing unless we get to feel it happen through someone that we care about. the idea of an enslaved race being a ticking time bomb to start a desolation is cool but it only works if someone we care about is effected by that desolation. so, could you imagine if a whole book was dedicated to doing world building while none of the characters were affected by it? this is part of why rhythm of war is such a disaster. side note, this is why the oaths worked in the early books. they were a fantastic combination of interesting world building bound by a tight mesh of character. thanks for reading.

I'm calm, it's fine. a lot of this was stated in your original argument or the following responses. I understand the desire to not go in circles but you've responded to nothing that I've said in my last comment. a lot of what you've brought up here are things that I've already responded to, either you didn't listen or you didn't care because you've just repeated yourself verbatim. I'm not asking for your methods to evaluate a story. I'm looking for your methods to evaluate prose. pls just respond to my arguments.

you agreed that there were objective markers for quality of prose. reread the comment. I said prose can be objectively judged for quality, you agreed. I don't believe I've cited an objective marker for prose quality, I was going to try to come to consensus with you on that. wtf is a 'consistent plot movement'. emotion is mainly evoked through character reactions but ik what you mean. I'm starting to feel like I'm repeating myself, but modern language breaks a scene because it's not consistent with the world we were shown in the early books. the whole point of coming to consensus was to try and find common ground to judge by. again, I feel like I'm repeating myself. characters who speak in a medievalist way can't naturally transition to modern over the course of only a few years. it's just not possible. if your telling me Brandon deliberately did that, then I'd simply have to say it was a mistake. that's not what I'm saying. you're trying to cite something that's never mentioned or even vaguely alluded to in the books. it's 'your analysis' in that you've mostly concluded that without the books' input. if you didn't come here willing to have your mind changed, then why are you bothering to respond to me. pls, if you're just wasting my time, stop. none of this adds value to this conversation. you've already said that you like modern language in previous comments, I heard you and I understand what you mean. pls don't bring it up again.

hold on, didn't you just agree with me that there were objective metrics for quality great, let's use this. you name any metric for quality that you want and I'll outdo it. do you genuinely believe that Brandon knew or cared about that when he was writing, or do you think that he just wrote what was normal to him. the phrase being used in the past doesn't mean that it isn't a popular phrase in the present. also, you missed a point on my last comment. if the change is based in age and nothing else, the youth of book one would talk differently from their parents, which they do not. also, no one ever mentions talking differently from their parents.

it's just an easy way to prove a dip in quality. you take the best Shallan conversation in book 5 and I'll take the best one in book 1 and we see who's got the better one. fen uses modern language. she couches some of her phrases in 'no offence' like a modern person would. combined with Shallan, we see the shift in dialogue doesn't have anything to do with age groups. Also, if that were true, then it would be visible in book one, which it isn't

what would you say is the most intelligently written Shallan conversation in book 5? more then just a single line, a set of lines. I worry that we're getting our wires crossed here. when I say depth of dialogue issues, I mean in the later books, not when she lets her guard down in the first few books. also, I'm not sure if natural language = modern day. ok, I'd say that the shift is completely unnatural. more then justified things like lift picking up foreign words. I'm not talking about small instances, but a general trend towards talking more like modern people. I'd say it's borderline impossible for a society of people in the linguistic period of book 1 to , over the course of only a few years, transition into modern speak. I agree that Brandon's mode of talking probably to blame. The man's just getting older and the way he writes is shifting. That, in turn, changes the way that people in world speak. but it's absolutely not natural. what do you mean by 'this one', can you clarify?

My brother in Christ, that's part of the comment you're responding to. I agreed that some loss of formality can be accepted, but the loss of intelligence and depth of dialogue cannot. My advice would be to do some direct comparisons between book 1 and 5 dialogue/prose. Once you realize how different the quality levels are, it'll start to bother you too. I'm glad that we can at least agree that a change is happening. Can I ask if you'd agree that this is to some degree unnatural? As in, do you think any of the characters (even as they undergo arcs) would shift up their register this much? And does a sudden shift into modern day dialogue make sense for this shift? edit: sorry, I just reread your comment and need to add something. prose is absolutely not subjective. enjoyment can be subjective, but there are objective measures for quality.

the ones that I'd most like to be ruled by: Devotion + Endowment. Seems like they'd be very happy to hand out power. Honor + Cultivation. (I'm assuming the sibling is a usable metric for what a shard of the power would look like) Invention + Dominion. It's mentioned that invention travels all over, making different projects and then leaving. I'd like to see what would happen if they were tied to a specific location. the ones that probably can't function: Odium + Ambition. We've probably already seen this in the form of the Evil on Threnody. (idk if mercy is mixed into the soup there too) Reason + Whimsy. This might actually create another harmony situation with the opposing intents. Devotion + Odium. I can't decide if a united Passion shard would be a good or bad thing. I suspect bad, the shard would probably have a kid's sense of reasoning, lashing out randomly. Virtuosity + Ambition: Would probably try to create a birds of paradise type world where everything is based on your ability to be beautiful. It seems like any of the shards in combination with ruin would eventually end the world. Here are some of the most fun ideas for it. Ruin + Devotion. I have no idea what this would look like, but it would probably be fun to read about. Ruin + Ambition. The world probably just instantly vaporizes. Ruin + Reason. Sadism?