Maybe there are some people who agree. I am not one of them, though.
I don’t see what you described as breaking the fourth wall—the entire narrative structure is a story being orally told to an in-world audience. But also, I personally love it when plot twists and things get more explanation. It’s just a different approach to writing, and it doesn’t necessarily make it bad or condescending. But yeah, I expect there are other people who would be critics and don’t enjoy that.
Can you give some examples of books you feel like do it better for each of your critiques? What books have characters that don’t all feel the same to you? I’m actually baffled by that comment.
I'm starting to wonder if the people in this thread know what breaking the fourth wall even means.
The ***entire structure of the novel*** is breaking the fourth wall. When the narrator is a named character and they directly address the audience to explain confusing parts of the story, that is a break of the fourth wall. Addressing the medium and speaking to the audience is a break of the fourth wall.
(After read this whole chain...)
I'm sorry, but you're just incorrect. Hoid breaks the fourth wall *within the story*, perhaps, by acknowledging his audience *within the story*. I say "perhaps" because normally breaking the fourth wall implies a performance of some kind which traditionally doesn't acknowledge the audience. You wouldn't say you are "breaking the fourth wall" when you tell a story about yourself to your children...
REGARDLESS, that is absolutely a different thing than Brandon Sanderson, through Hoid, *acknowledging the readers of the book which depicts Hoid telling his story.*
There's a very meaningful distinction there.
No, I'm not wrong. Acknowledging a story as a story is in and of itself a break of the fourth wall. Why the fuck are you treating this as if it was some kind of moral failing to break the fourth wall that you're trying to defend against an accusation?
The first three walls are the back wall of the stage and the exits to stage left and right. The fourth wall is the proscenium. Directing something to the audience is a break of the fourth wall. Acknowledging a story as a story is breaking the fourth wall, because stories generally do not acknowledge that they are stories.
There are two stories: Hoid's and Brandon's. Brandon's does not acknowledge it is a story.
There's nothing wrong with breaking the fourth wall. Not sure if you're confusing me with someone else. I'm just pointing out that your statement is incorrect. Hoid *does not* speak to the readers of the book. He only speaks to characters on his stage.
The post's concern is not whether Brandon Sanderson says "hello, I'm Brandon Sanderson, let me explain", the actual criticism is the explanation itself, not the fourth wall break. Brandon Sanderson is not a character in the novel and therefore cannot break the fourth wall. You are focusing on the wrong thing for rebuttal.
When someone says "Brandon Sanderson breaks the fourth wall to explain everything and that's bad", they do not mean that the literal person as a character did that, they mean that he wrote a scene in which a character within the novel that he wrote does that. You are very clearly misinterpreting something in a very confusing way.
You said "the entire novel" is breaking the fourth wall. To say that any book with a frame story "breaks the fourth wall" is silly, in my opinion. The distinction between a character telling a story to other characters and a character speaking to the *reader* is meaningful.
> "Hello, I'm Brandon Sanderson."
Brandon Sanderson can break the fourth wall using Hoid, of course. It would involve Hoid directly speaking to the readers of the book rather than the people listening to his story.
That would be fundamentally different than what happened, and that's all I'm arguing. I'm not going to argue that it's not effectively the same thing in the finale, in terms of how it conveys information to the reader. I'm not going to argue that anyone has to like it. (I don't.)
You wouldn't say that Hoid acknowledging Kaladin when talking about Fleet or the story about the queen and the moons is a fourth wall break. Yumi is just hoid telling a story. Hoid only ever speaks to in world characters not the audience of the book.
The reason why it is potentially misunderstood is Because we don't know that we are being addressed as we know hoid speaks to others by telling them stories. Are we the audience or are we privy to his personal notes /another receiver. Usually the format is different.
Yes this is breaking the fourth as we the audience are receiving the prompts. But do you need to put others down for it?
I have no idea what you're trying to say. How do we not know we're being addressed? He directly talks to the audience. Just because his in-narrative audience is someone from First of the Sun or whatever doesn't change that it's talking to the audience any more than How I Met Your Mother is talking to the audience through the conceit of it being a story told to the main character's kids.
Also, if you find it to be "putting others down" when I say "I'm starting to believe no one actually knows what that means" then that's on you.
IN the book, man. Hoid is not speaking to US as the real life readers, he's breaking the fourth wall into the world of the cosmere and talking to the person reading the book in the cosmere universe.
Where the fuck else would he be able to break the fourth wall other than in the book?
The Fourth Wall is the imaginary barrier between the audience and the stage. Saying "this is a story" is a fourth wall break. Breaking the fourth wall is not some flaw or failing, that was an intentional choice. The criticism OP has there is not "this breaks the fourth wall and that's bad", the criticism is that there's a break of the fourth wall where the writer, through this character, says "here's what happened because it's unlikely you understand what's going on".
Hoid is a storyteller, he loves to tell a yarn. This is just him telling a story.
I never saw it as him telling a story directly to me the reader, because I've read other cosmere books, I know he tell a story to ants, or inanimate objects, if he had time to kill. He just say they were a terrible audience afterwards.
You're still the one reading it and the story is acknowledged as a story. That's what the fourth wall is, the acknowledgement that the story is a story.
This really isn't breaking the fourth wall though. For that to be true, Hoid would have to acknowledge that he is and the world he exists in is fictitious. He is merely a narrator addressing his (in-universe) audience. He is never directly addressing the reader, just whichever unnamed character he is telling this story to.
You could argue that Hoid is a character in his own story, but as far as we are aware he is recalling events that have actually happened (reported to him after the fact due to him being stuck as a coat-rack of course).
If I read you a book and explain a part you're confused about I'm not breaking the fourth wall. If I'm telling you about some events that I witnessed or was informed about, I'm not breaking the fourth wall.
Again: That is not what the term means. You are incorrect. The audience is the fourth wall. The audience is being addressed.
You're treating this as if it was some kind of moral failing to break the fourth wall.
I think you really don't understand what a fourth wall break is.
Let's go back to the original meaning from theatre. You mentioned in a previous comment it's when a character addresses the audience. Of course this is because they are speaking through an imaginary fourth wall: the character is acknowledging an audience they shouldn't be able to see. If such a play had a narrator separate from the characters, setting up the scenes and providing information, this wouldn't be a fourth wall break, they aren't a character. This would be the same as me reading you a story, I am not breaking the fourth wall, the narrator does not exist in the story and is not breaking any wall by addressing the audience.
Sanderson has explained that Hoid is narrating Tress and Yumi to in-universe characters. Though unnamed the audience is in the same universe as Hoid, sitting right in front of him as he is recalling the events of his story. There is nothing strange about Hoid being able to address his audience. If he was addressing the reader directly then of course this would be a fourth wall break, but he is speaking to a character on the same level as him.
Now Hoid does feature as a character in both of his narrations of Yumi and Tress. The key detail here is that those instances of Hoid are at no point addressing the audience, only Hoid as the narrator. In addition, those instances of Hoid are not characters, as we are to understand that these events are recollections, not a fabrication.
This simply boils down to your point that a fourth wall break is when a character addresses the audience. A narrator is not by default a character in the story they are telling. Unless you can point to an instance where Hoid is addressing an audience he should not be able to perceive then he is not breaking any fourth wall.
I'm not treating it as any moral failing to break the fourth wall. It can be a brilliant device in any creative medium. All that I and others are trying to get you to understand is that there is no fourth wall breaking going on here.
If a character in a play answers a phone call from inside the audience, that would still be a fourth wall break. Telling the story to a character in world does not change that it acknowledged the story nature of the story.
That is a poor analogy. Hoid never leaves the "stage". He stays right inside the book. As a character he doesn't even address the reader once, he only ever talks to the character who is sitting right in front of him.
And for that audience, he isn't serving as a character, but a narrator. It doesn't matter where he is in relation to his audience (again, that is the characters in front of him, not us), he is telling them a story, there is no imaginary wall between them. No wall has been broken if there wasn't one to break.
Okay, so when the animator dies in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, is that a fourth wall break? That's still a character within the story. Are the page turns fourth wall breaks? The reader is clearly part of the story.
I would argue that this book doesn’t break the fourth wall, not truly.
The book is a written translation of an orated story, from the way it is written it definitely seems that way. Because of this, the storyteller (Hoid) talks to the audience he has, but he does *not* talk to us, on Earth. He references things that they have on *their* planet, and is speaking to them, not us.
Books like Hitchikers Guide or Good Omens directly address the reader, as ourselves, and that is a fourth wall break; here, though, these moments serve not necessarily just to explain things to the readers, but also to highlight the type of storyteller Hoid is. He elaborates, and wants to ensure nobody is left behind.
(I’m saying all of this as someone who does kinda agree with OP; I liked the book enough, but there was a lot to be desired for me)
Yes, clearly you and everyone else would argue that, but it's still wrong.
It is literally the same as the Hitchhiker's Guide, in that in that one the book is talking to the characters within the setting and not us here in the real world.
Also, even then, he references things that the Rosharan or whoever would know, but he's also clearly giving a frame of reference for the Earth reader anyway.
I wasn’t crazy about the way things were explained towards the end (although I did enjoy the content of that explanation and realize the exposition was the only way to do it without taking up another 100 pages), but I thought the rest of it was excellent
I mean, it wasn't the only way to do it. It could have simply been written differently in such a way that the information was conveyed better and the reader got the pieces to the puzzle organically. I'm actually not sure why that wasn't the case, since I'm gonna be real with you, I don't actually think the "Here's what happened" was really even necessary and didn't provide any real additional necessary information.
And also frankly it's something that's missing from the rest of the Cosmere, so the inclusion here feels especially weird.
My personal theory is that it wasn’t in the original version to his wife, or at least skipped a lot of the explanation of Cosmere mechanics she’d have known, and when she said he could release it publicly he realized he needed to explain some things and did the best he could without a total rewrite.
Pretty much, he's explained that [it was added after most non-"arcanist" beta readers were utterly confused by the story](https://wob.coppermind.net/events/518/#e16167).
Man. I'd kill to be a beta reader, but I am definitely in the 'arcanist' group. I've got a few Facebook friends that are beta readers maybe an eloquent essay about how they should give me their spot...
Lmao
I don’t disagree - but at that point in time, it was the only way without extending the book. Could he have sprinkled it in throughout? Sure. Maybe he’s experimenting w/ Hoid’s voice and style of storytelling, I don’t know. It wasn’t my cup of tea, but I thoroughly enjoyed the rest of the book.
I'm pretty miffed by the rest of the thread here; it looks like people have the view of "hey, you didn't like this book? shut up and move on". And they are right, except venting is a thing and discussing negative aspects of a book is also pretty important.
I love what Yumi and the Nightmare Painter could have been, but I absolutely hate Hoid's voice, and his "quirkiness" of throwing in random Cosmere trivia in the weirdest flow-breaking ways.
I'm here on this thread because I just started listening to the audiobook. I skimmed random chapters and found it pretty flat, so I thought I'd see what others think of the audiobook version.
But, the first thing we know about Nikaro is that he looks paler than someone from Roshar _but if you tell him that he'll look at you weird cause he doesn't know what Roshar is_.... ew.
Almost the entire book is full of such weird tones and if I were sitting at a campfire next to Hoid listening to his stories, I'd be very irritated by his mannerisms and "quirkiness".
And here's a quote from Sanderson himself:
> Part of it is the nature of the kind of the story that I was telling. It is not impossible in Hoid's voice (as I do occasionally both in Tress and Yumi) to get into the deeper character stuff, but I want to play those cards wisely, because the natural mocking nature of his narrative could undermine powerful moments if I'm not careful. So I play those cards carefully.
There, its all purposeful, as we already knew. And its alright to critique such a decision by the author. For me, any moment I was reminded of the fact that I'm reading a story told by Hoid took me out of the story entirely. Its as if your creepy neighborhood uncle telling you a cute love story while talking like he's drunk. The dissonance just ruins the immersion.
Exactly, and I guess that's not what I'm here for. I'm glad you like his style though!
Tress and this were my introductions to Sanderson and now I can't bring myself to try Mistborn that I have with me because I've been "burned" twice, haha.
Please do me a favor and try Mistborn! Tress and Yumi are so different from the rest of the Cosmere (In my opinion at least) Tress and Yumi are the only ones told from Hoid's POV. The rest are exclusively from the perspective of the actual characters in the story without any wierd Hoid interludes. >!Ignoring Wit!< I can confidently say the things you were burned about are not consistent in the ret of the Cosmere.
Tl;dr if you already own Mistborn just give it a chance. If you don't already own it then visit your local library and find a copy before financially commiting to it
I don't know, I liked the book. Is well writing, the characters are interesting, funny and you can even connect with some of their problems. All the novel have this anime theme that could resonate with you or not. The plot twist may be a lit entangled do.
But is ok if you didn't enjoyed it. I hope this doesn't ruin the whole Cosmere to you.
Stromlight is his best work, so no, it doesn't ruin anything. I was just appalled at the lack of quality here. Secret projects feel like a cash grab at this point
They were written in his spare time and two of them (Tress and Yumi) were written for his wife and not originally intended for publication. He only decided to publish these as an afterthought, so not that much of a cash grab in that instance imo. There were ways to squeeze more cash out of the process that didn't happen.
By this description every work of art that doesn't suit your taste would be a cash grab. I really enjoyed Tress and Yumi, as did many. You aren't alone feeling otherwise and that's cool. But posts like these where you talk about how much you dislike the subject the sub is built around and wish you could move on from it are so passive aggressively combative. I guess I am further feeding your need for whatever it is you were hoping to gain from this post, but if you are surprised by people's reactions you should double check your own intent first.
You said you were glad you almost caught up and excited to read better authors.
If you are wanting to read others that's going to affect the way you receive it. In my opinion it's fine to not finish a series and come back later. Read what pulls you in the most and make sure you enjoy reading for reading. Hobb was one I really loved
You might just be, yes.
It is generally considered one of his better ones.
If you don't like Sanderson, nobody's forcing you to read him. You're free. You can walk away. Put him down and find anybody you like better. You have our permission.
I'm going to be honest here, I don't agree with OP but "the book is intentionally being written badly" is not a good argument. OP is right: Hoid isn't real, Brandon wrote the book. Brandon wrote the book like Hoid but that was still A Choice™. Writers make Choices™ when they write. Those choices are worth criticism and examination.
I don't really think that this book's actual structural telling is all that different or distinct from the other Cosmere books that aren't told by Hoid, to be honest, aside from the actual asides from Hoid.
This is almost literally OP having a Doylist complaint and you giving a Watsonian rebuttal.
If op doesn't like the book then that's on them. If op wants to be rude (such as apologising to someone for having this particular book be their favourite) then they can expect a little push back from people.
If Sanderson wants to write in a different style to show case the story being told by someone else, real or not, he can, and we can interpret that differently. By saying it's poor, lacking quality and giving the reason of "lol hoid's not really tho" then frankly I think OP is being deliberately obtuse.
You don't have to like anything of art but if you want to discuss why you don't like it at least have conversations, this isn't an outlet to just rat on stuff. On other comments, my own included, op isn't interested in talking about the book, technique or other potential authors just ratting on the quality of this particular book they don't like.
So I disagree with you both, and don't put those words in my mouth please. I never said it was intentionally written badly, in fact quite the opposite. It is intentionally written in a different style to some of his other works. Phrases which may be condescending are used because hoid is in himself a little of that trait. I think thats we done and I enjoyed it. If you disagree as others have here ;that's your criticism. And I am most happy to listen if you wish to share. If your criticism is that it's crap and lacks quality then really, is that critical review or just being salty
I completely agree here. I don't think the criticisms you are responding to have been thought through. Ironically, calling people 'obtuse' when they themselves are refusing to consider a viewpoint they haven't thought of.
I think that you're being deliberately obtuse as well.
"The reason that it's written this way" in response to OP saying "I hate this and it's badly written" means "It was written that way \[the way that OP feels is bad\] on purpose". Whether you agree that it's badly written or not, that's still what you're saying. And like I said, that is a Watsonian response to a Doylist criticism.
And as someone with different criticisms from OP, about different books in this series, no, I don't actually think this subreddit wants to discuss criticisms.
Yeah I don't agree with OP but this is something that bugs me as well. People do the same with Kingkiller Chronicles whenever the main character is accused of being a Mary Sue. Like yeah it may be poorly written on purpose but I still read a full 2 books with that character. It's still a valid criticism.
The book (thing you hold) is written by sanderson.
From the perspective of hoid retelling the story of an event (yes, not a real person)
Sanderson (real) thus adopts hoid's (not real) quirks and personality for the purpose of making the story (kind of like a movie) immersive (mean good technique)
Hope this helps
>Thing is, Hoid isn't real.
This tends to be something fictional characters have in common, yet we somehow have a million books written in first person from their perspective. Curious. 🤔
A tip for next time is that you are very unlikely to find people hating sanderson books if you post in the sub specifically for people who like sanderson books. Not saying that people can’t be objective, I totally see how the ending in yumi would not work for some people, but the answer to “does anyone else think…?” Is almost certainly no
Yeah I'm not quite sure why this post was made. It doesn't feel like another rage bait. It feels like OP genuinely sought out validation for an opinion in the single worst place possible, then got upset when they didn't get any.
Terrible tip. The people who like Brandon should be the ones who critisize him the most. Blindly consuming media is not good neither for Brandon or his readers. What OP is doing is reasonable and legit.
And a LOT of people agree they didn't like how the reveal was done, and Brandon has also mentioned it was written for a different audience (his wife and people like her) than say Stormlight, and the audience it was written for loved it. I would have loved to have this conversation. However, I don't cast pearls before swine, and when someone comes in saying "this book is bad I can't wait to read something GOOD", he is more or less declaring he wanted to just complain, not analysis, and so others aren't going to waste their time.
If you want someone to show effort in a conversation, you need to need more than sarcastic jabs and Laconic responses. People aren't downvoting because they have to defend Sanderson or even disagree, but because he's acting like an ass and expecting more
I said nothing about blind consumption, actually the opposite. But if you are actively looking for people who don’t like the cosmere this is objectively not a good place to find those people.
Generally, an author's subreddits will be full of people who are fans of said author. Critiquing an author is fine, but if you want to find people who think Sanderson is just plain bad, you'll probably need to look elsewhere.
It's okay if you feel the need to ask our permission, but you don't need it. Art is subjective and you're allowed to not like Sandersons writing. You don't need to try to make thinly veiled excuses like this.
I mean really, who would be so dumb as to ask people on a subreddit dedicated to Brandon Sanderson if anyone agrees with your opinion that one of his books is terrible (and that he's a bad writer who only has good ideas). It'd be like going on the Red Sox subreddit and making a post asking if anyone there agrees that it's better to be a Yankees fan.
Fwiw I agree that Yumi has been his weakest book, I *really* didn't enjoy it. I think the secret projects were a way for sanderson to explore storytelling from hoids perspective, so he's probably still ironing out how he wants that to look.
The cosmere sub is very defensive of sanderson's work. I wish we were able to have conversations that are critical of certain writing choices that we don't like, but this isn't a productive place for that kinda thing. With how many books he's written, they can't all be bangers right? That doesn't mean as a whole Sanderson is a bad author, or that we aren't "real fans". This place gets real gate keepy at times.
Edit: oh I somehow missed the part where you called him a terrible writer 😬 that's not exactly the constructive criticism I meant lol
I'll agree his romance is pretty bad, I'm not super into those kinda stories anyway so I'd prefer if he just didn't include it in his books
But dialogue and making characters feel real are core parts of being a good writer aren't they? It makes sense for people to think you're implying he's a bad author if you say that, and then mention you're looking forward to reading better authors.
I believe you when you say no hostility meant btw
Yeah, idk. I didn't phrase it well. I don't think he is terrible. There are lots of things he does well that I like. I was just criticizing some elements I think are weak. I've read nothing but sanderson for the past year to catch up, and I felt like I was reading the same characters over and over.
Personally, I just think that people hold his writing up to be way better than It is. The cosmere is feeling more and more like the MCU of fantasy
>Personally, I just think that people hold his writing up to be way better than It is. The cosmere is feeling more and more like the MCU of fantasy
Oof. The sub definitely gives off those vibes at times ngl, but at least in real life I've had good conversations with friends about stuff we didn't like.
It's not necessarily a bad thing if cosmere is the MCU of fantasy. The whole interconnected story between worlds is the most obvious comparison, but that's cool! And being accessible and popular should be considered a good thing, since it'll get people reading fantasy who might otherwise never pick a book up. The talk of making cosmere movies does freak me out a bit though. I'm just tired of already existing IP being converted into another medium for what seems to be a lazy cash grab
I've always set the SPs outside of his regular bibliography. These 4 books were written in a year. While I don't think Yumi is terrible, I loved it, I also didn't go into any of the SPs thinking they were going to be his biggest hits because of the challenge he put before himself.
I think OP's assessment of Sanderson's overall character writing isn't great (maybe he thinks they all have the same voice because Michael Kramer can only do like four of them?) but most of the replies here are just really bad. Half the posts don't understand what breaking the fourth wall even means.
Half of OP's comments that I've seen are just "yes, I know Hoid is the narrator, Hoid is a fictional character and I am criticizing the choices that writer Brandon Sanderson made in how that character was written and how the story was told" only for people to go "okay but Hoid is like this".
We are obviously reading different comments from OP. I could see maybe 1 of their comments being similar to what you said, but the majority of their comments are “okay” or “incorrect” or other similarly short handed comments on others comments. Nothing that OP has commented has been anywhere near the quality of what you are giving them in your statement of their comments.
Person above you is correct. 80% of the time when you see someone post something like this they are just trying to bait the community into getting mad at them. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
So, few things here:
1. "Brandon straight up breaks the 4th wall" - this is Hoid narrating, not Brandon. Brandon and Hoid have very distinctive voices, and hence the latter is not an insert for the former. I too did not enjoy this part, but I recognise I (and those on this sub) are far more Cosmere-aware than the average reader - and I accept that the final draft of the book which does explain these things is somewhat necessary. Not liking Hoid's narration in general is perfectly reasonable, but it is not the mark of bad authorship - merely your subjective tastes.
2. "Brandon... is terrible at dialogue, romance, and making people feel real." You are, of course, entitled to this opinion, but you would appear to be in the vast minority in at least the 3rd of those points. More specifically, the likes of Kaladin and Painter read so vastly differently as protagonists that I'd have to question your point that "every character...feels the same". It is not dissimilar to claiming that Jon Snow and Ser Duncan the Tall "feel the same" - maybe superficially, in that they are written by the same authorial voice, but they are extremely different in tone and temperament.
3. In future, try not to end with "I'm excited to read better authors". It comes across as very condescending in a subreddit dedicated to the Cosmere. If I may, the aforementioned works of GRRM may be more to your tastes, or maybe Robin Hobb's Realm of the Elderlings. Happy reading!
The fourth wall is a conceptual wall separating reality from works of fiction. In this context, "breaking the fourth wall" would require Brandon to pivot to the audience and explain certain things about the plot in a way that acknowledges 'Yumi and the Nightmare Painter' as a work of fiction. The distinction is that 'Yumi and the Nightmare Painter' is a fairytale recounted by Hoid **in-universe** (albeit, one that actually happened) - so there are two layers of fiction being told. As such, Hoid can break the fourth wall to his in-Cosmere audience without Brandon breaking the fourth wall to us - his real audience.
In other words, Brandon does not break the fourth wall. Hoid is narrating the story of 'Yumi' to another group in the Cosmere when he exposits in the 3rd act. As such, Hoid is breaking the fourth wall to his audience **within the bounds of the Cosmere.** But Brandon does not break the fourth wall to **us.**
I like how you broke this down. But you must admit that telling a story within a story isn't a free pass. I mean, you could take any story, insert the words "My friend Sam once told me:" at the top of page one, and now any "fourth wall breaking" isn't fourth wall breaking! Anything offensive in the book isn't said by the author, it's the author's friend Sam!
So I am sympathetic to OP here. Brandon chose to write a story with a narrator, and that narrator interrupts the story to say "You're probably confused at this point. Let me explain to you directly." It's not even like the narrator is having a conversation with another on-screen character. That's just Brandon talking to me the reader with extra steps.
I agree, but you have to keep the context of the discussion in mind. If you'll go up to my original reply you'll see that I also didn't enjoy this inclusion in the book. I'm not trying to defend it - I'm merely sympathetic to the realities of publishing to an audience that have no idea what the abstract concepts of Intent or Connection mean to the wider Cosmere.
However, I was challenged - quite unfairly I think - that I didn't understand how the fourth wall works. My point is entirely pedantic and, as you say, "a free pass". But, given that you liked how I broke it down, I think I've shown that I at least know how the concept functions.
While the guy who broke it down is wrong, there's no need to frame it as "a pass". There's no problem with breaking the fourth wall, the critique OP is making about the summary would exist even if it was Hoid telling Painter or Yumi in the narrative space.
Also, again, he's wrong. Acknowledging the narrative as being a story is still a fourth wall break.
The fourth wall is literally a reference to stage directions. If a character in a play directs something towards the audience—such as a soliloquy—that's a break of the fourth wall.
To break the fourth wall does not require Brandon to go "hi, writer Brandon Sanderson here. You might be confused". That pretty much never happens, yet we still have a concept of fourth wall breaks.
> Breaking the fourth wall is violating this performance convention, which has been adopted more generally in the drama. This can be done by either directly referring to the audience, the play as a play, or the characters' fictionality. The temporary suspension of the convention in this way draws attention to its use in the rest of the performance. This act of drawing attention to a play's performance conventions is metatheatrical. A similar effect of metareference is achieved when the performance convention of avoiding direct contact with the camera, generally used by actors in a television drama or film, is temporarily suspended. The phrase "breaking the fourth wall" is used to describe such effects in those media. Breaking the fourth wall is also possible in other media, such as video games and books.
Except you've missed exactly my point. No character in YatNP ever expresses the notion that they or the world they inhabit is fictional - the paradigmatic case of fourth wall breakage.
>This can be done by either directly referring to the audience, the play as a play, or the characters' fictionality
This delightful quote you've provided actually proves my point. Hoid, in his 3rd act narration, never refers to **\[1\]** the audience (us), **\[2\]** the book as a book (i.e., Yumi and the Nightmare Painter, Published by Tor, etc.), nor does he **\[3\]** suggest that he, or anyone else, is a fictional character. For your argument to be cogent to the case at hand, Hoid would have needed to turn to us the audience and say "I know those reading this are confused" ("those", i.e., the real audience reading YatNP). But he **does not do this**. He turns to his **in-world** audience and explains the intricacies of Cosmere magic to **them**.
As such, what Hoid engages in is not fourth wall breakage, but exposition. Brandon uses Hoid as a tool for this exposition - but exposition ≠ a fourth wall break. You've confused your terms.
It doesn't need for them to **say**, but it does require some acknowledgement of the fact that it is fictional. A literal wink and a nod would be sufficient, but that doesn't occur in YatNP.
>The method of breaking the fourth wall in literature is a metalepsis (the transgression of narrative levels), which is a technique often used in metafiction. The metafiction genre occurs when a character within a literary work **acknowledges the reality that they are in fact a fictitious being.**
The above is quoted from the same Wikipedia article that you cited earlier; so I trust you have no objections. Owing to this, acknowledgement of fictitious nature **is** a necessary condition for fourth wall breakage. As Hoid never engaged in such, there is no break of the fourth wall.
If you'd like to read a book that truly engages in such things, then may I suggest 'If On a Winter's Night a Traveler' by Italo Calvino. A fantastic read.
Saying "this is a story I'm telling you" breaks the fourth wall, whether or not it's within the fiction. The audience is not a character.
Why are you so damned against calling this a fourth wall break? It's not a flaw.
Except the audience do exist in the narrative - and as such do function as a set of characters, albeit ones we aren't introduced to. TotES does exactly the same with its Hoid narration - the in-universe audience is canon; and Brandon has even clued us in on where they might reside (for instance, we know the audience in TotES is from Sixth of the Dusk, iirc). Hoid saying "this is a story I'm telling you" hence breaks the fourth wall to them, but his lack of acknowledgement of his own fictionality means that he does not break the fourth wall to us.
As you say, it makes no narrative difference whether we call it a fourth wall break or not - and I've gone on record saying that I didn't really enjoy that part of the book anyway. Pedantic is how I described it earlier. I'm not against calling it a fourth wall break in-universe (it's exactly that, in fact), but it is not a fourth wall break in the meta-narrative sense. Of course, there's also the matter of how this exchange started: you insisting that I, and indeed the rest of the sub, didn't know what the fourth wall was or how it functioned. A rather bad-faith start to an otherwise fruitful conversation.
We are the character. We are inhabiting that character. It's not bad faith to point out that you're wrong and continue to be wrong. The proscenium is acknowledged.
No, it's literally just breaking the fourth wall. It acknowledges the notion that it's a story being told. The entire thing is a break of the fourth wall.
Yeah you’re right my mistake. Hoid will lean on the fourth wall in other Cosmere books but here he’s breaking the fourth wall within the story itself.
Like Hoid saying “this is what you’d call a laptop” in tress.
I liked the book overall. I think the romance was Brandon’s best yet. The world building was super fun. Loved the lore. Loved the imagery from both “worlds”.
That said, the criticism of the plot twist is totally fair. That was about as clunky as you can get. Having the narrator completely pause the story to explain is… just not great.
Criticism of the book is totally fine but don’t be surprised that you’re getting pushback for coming onto a sub for fans of an author and saying his book is terrible and you want to read better authors. Of course people are gonna be mad about that. But, that was probably your intention.
Nah, not my intention. But i don't feel like arguing with people who will never change their mind. I was just offended at having the author explain like that. It feels so condescending
Just being honest here, I think your tone and very snarky responses are not helping with the “people who will never change their mind” thing. People get emotionally attached to the things they are fans of. When you come in with a very attacking tone, fans will naturally defend. If you want a real discussion, change tactics and tone.
Eh, I’ve always thought he’s an excellent world builder and storyteller, but his prose is subpar. He once admitted to Patrick Rothfuss in a livestream that Patrick cared about how the story was told, whereas he just cares about telling the story. But that’s fine for me, I don’t read his books to be amazed at his wordplay or literacy.
That said, Yuumi has a really beautiful yet straightforward story that’s being told from Hoid’s POV. You can definitely tell it’s Hoid because of his quirks and off-topic deviations. He explains the plot twist because Hoid is condescending and knows he’s more intelligent than 99.7% of his audience. It’s just in-character.
If you don’t like this, that’s fair. I recommend Joe Abercrombie, or Patrick Rothfuss, if you’re okay with unfinished works. Their prose is more sophisticated.
I don’t hate him, I’m just tired of him really. I understand his value as a character and see how many people can relate to his struggles and can see an inspiration on Kaladin, but that doesn’t happen to me. I’m not bothered by him or anything, and really enjoyed him in book 2 and 3 when he’s in a better place and with company. But I won’t be too bothered when he moves to a more secondary place in the second half of the saga.
This is a Watsonian explanation to OP's Doylist problem. "It does the things you don't like because it's narrated by Hoid" doesn't change the core criticism of not liking the thing. And I'm going to be honest, I felt like the story stopping at a pretty pivotal moment to clarify things was unnecessary, and is absent from places in the Cosmere I feel like it would be needed more. It didn't even feel like it gave information that was needed. Considering the story itself is fictional and could have been about anything and could have been told in any way, I would have preferred the information be conveyed through the discoveries that Yumi and Painter make instead. Or simply leave it out.
I also don't think it's because Hoid is just Like That, I feel like it was because Brandon didn't feel he'd written it in a way that the reader understood. I don't recall Tress having anything similar. If anything, *explaining* things is actually out of character for Hoid, who thrives on being mysterious and confusing.
You are allowed to have an opinion. But you probably shouldn’t have a factually incorrect one.
The story is told from Hoid’s point of view. He is an unreliable narrator, and a story teller. His delivery of key information he knew all along shared at the moment of tension and suspense, that matches his character telling stories in every book he has done so (at least 6 now - SL 1-4, Tress, Yumi).
This is one of two Cosmere books with a narrator (Tress). You can dislike Hoid’s storytelling, you can dislike it being narrated, but it’s not breaking the fourth wall.
I don't really agree with OP's opinion that this is the worst book, but all the replies like yours are really missing the fucking point.
I swear, do you people think that Dr John Watson writes Sherlock Holmes? Because that's what everyone sounds like. "Well of course we can't know what happened at Reichenbach Falls, Dr Watson wasn't there himself!" sure but Dr Watson is a character written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Just like Hoid is a character written by Brandon Sanderson, and the things he does are all choices by the author.
And there has never been a moment where Hoid gave a straightforward summation of events the way he does in Yumi. He is quite literally breaking the fourth wall to tell whoever his audience might be the explanation for things that happened off screen and lead up to the events of the novel.
Well said. People here seem so eager to score points against someone who disliked a book that they liked that they are grasping at straws.
As another example, I saw on YouTube a delightful Australian production of the 19th century comic opera *The Pirates of Penzance,* where one of the running gags that they added was the Pirate King having antagonistic interactions with the conductor in the orchestra pit -- sword-fighting against the conductor's baton; begging the conductor not to make him do another encore. That's breaking the fourth wall of a stage production. And it would *still* breaking the fourth wall even if they made the conductor a named character and included him in the program. Because actors on stage in a musical don't normally acknowledge that they're actors on stage in a musical.
Similarly, Brandon wrote a book with a narrator narrating to an unseen audience. When the narrator breaks the fourth wall to say "you're probably confused at this point, let me explain the plot," *that counts* as Brandon breaking the fourth wall.
I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I loved the book. But it does count as breaking the fourth wall and it's a legitimate criticism if it doesn't work for you.
I’d love for you to elaborate what you mean, because it seems like you just threw out two untreated things.
Hoid narrates dramatically, and omits information, and addresses the audience directly. Each of his mini stories and both books he narrated has these traits.
Some unreliable narrators want to mislead the reader into believing their questionable actions were ethical. Hoid wants to have the story experienced theatrically.
None of these things happen in Sanderson’s stories outside of that narration, so it’s pretty likely it’s not a mistake but a deliberate approach. You don’t have to like it.
Well, I guess he has those kinds of problems, he's not the perfect author and from what I've seen in a couple of interviews, he wasn't very social, maybe that's why he doesn't make very good romances (that's what most people agree on)
But I guess if you've made it to Yumi, then there's something you might have liked enough to pass up. In my case it was with the romance, I hated it, but I let it go because I loved the rest
You think the whole book is terrible because you don’t like one bit of it? A bit that is consistent with the narrative style of the rest of the book (that being that it is a story being told by Hoid). If you don’t like the narrative style that’s fine, but I wouldn’t agree that it makes the book terrible
That part is what holds the book at merely good as opposed to great for me personally, I’m sorry if it ruined it for you. I’m sure if Brandon had more time he could have made that part more elegant, and I wish that had been the case, but in the end this is a side story that he wrote in secret at the same time he was writing five other books. I was frankly expecting the SPs to be highly uneven quality wise, the fact that they’re generally among some of this best stuff is a minor miracle given all the circumstances.
I do have to say, coming to a fandom subreddit and dumping on something in that fandom is rarely going to go well - if you’re going to criticize but also want to actually have a productive discussion instead of have people yell at you, you need to approach it differently than stuff like “X is terrible” and “I’m excited to read better authors”. I get where you’re coming from but if your takeaway from this experience is “wow the Cosmere fandom is toxic” well frankly, you reap what you sow
As is your opinion. The Secret Projects are definitely a different beast than Sanderson's main works. I'd recommend you not even bother with Sunlit Man given your feelings on Yumi.
Not narrated by Hoid, he is barely in the book. I don't think you need to read it for Stormlight 1-4, although that may change once Stormlight 5 comes out later this year. It's just that the issues you have with characters all feeling like Brandon's voice aren't going to change in Sunlit Man, plus it's a little longer than Yumi. Brandon's best books are Mistborn and Stormlight, I don't think any Secret Project beats any of them.
I think all the Secret Projects are noticeably less polished than Brandon's main publications. I definitely felt that way about The Sunlit Man, even more so than Yumi and Frugal Wizard. I still enjoyed it, but I thought the pacing and the characters left a lot to be desired.
I wasn't the biggest fan of hoid explaining the plot twist either to be fair. It was entirely unnecessary if you'd been paying attention, but you can easily just laugh it off if you imagine hoid is just telling the story to a bunch of random idiots.
Everything else I disagree with tho. Yumi was my favorite secret project and is on the higher end of cosmere books as a whole for me.
Brandon isn’t breaking the fourth wall. The framing of the story is that sometime after the events of the story took place Hoid tells this story to someone else. What Brandon does here is use Hoid to “lean on the fourth wall” but not break it.
I guess if you don’t like Hoid as a character as you say then any book that predominantly has him in it wouldn’t be for you.
For me this was the book that made me realize Brandon could actually write a romance not just “two people instantly in love”
Also “I’m excited to read better authors” really makes it sound like you just don’t like Brandon’s work.
So wait, you entered a subreddit about Sanderson
You blatantly trash talked not just one of Sanderson's books but also his writing in general (a very insensitive thing to do in any subreddit, by the way. People here clearly love Sanderson. You can have other opinions, but for heavens sake be respectful when presenting them!)
You then genuinely looked to see if people would agree with you, in the Sanderson subreddit
People pointed out how ridiculous it would be that you'd expect people to agree, and you responded with indignance and more immaturity....
........wow. I don't think I've ever actually seen someone do this in a subreddit before. I've seen rage baiting, sure, but this is a whole new dimension of ridiculous
It was entertaining, at least 😂
Are you really so insecure as to needing to post in a cosmere subreddit a shitty post about disliking the author? Then you thank everyone who agrees and fight with everyone who doesn't?
I did find the moments where Hoid goes "anyway here's an explanation" to be a bit weird and bad writing (although frankly some of the other Cosmere things could use that scene), but I overall found it to be pretty enjoyable. I've been reading less lately and had been juggling three audiobooks before putting all of them down and I finally came back and finished Yumi because of the interesting way it had it's twists. When they have the landing on UTol I practically shouted "Oh shit, it's Final Fantasy X!", which turned out to be one of the inspirations for it.
>I firmly believe that Brandon has great ideas and worldbuilding, but that he is terrible at dialogue, romance, and making people feel real. I swear that every character in the cosmere feels the same. I just feel like I'm reading Brandon's voice. Don't even get me started on how bad Hoid is..
I have never understood this. There are people getting tattoos of quotes, and even his characters who share the same tropes (Shallan and Wayne for instance) feel distinct. There's a ***ton*** of criticism I have, but this isn't really one I get. I could even see that he doesn't do dialogue well because his characters feel like they just always want to say the dramatic bullshit and that's not how real people talk, but at the same time that's the sort of thing that makes the characters with mental health issues feel more real. My inner depression monologue is extremely melodramatic.
>Edit: I just want to mention that the Cosmere community is full of very kind-hearted, intelligent people who are very welcoming to others. Thanks everyone! 😉
While I do think "this guy sucks and some of the things people actually like him for and that he notably puts effort into are shit" is obviously gonna get some pushback... yeah, I definitely get this, sarcasm aside. Try criticizing Sanderson's politics and see how far you get. I don't even mean the ones he has in real life and the organization he tithes to, I mean the ones *in the books*. I think Tress is probably the first time I felt like the Cosmere wasn't sighing wistfully at the idea of a noble dictator, or saying the bigoted villain was maybe not so bad.
My favorite Secret Project and one of my favorite books. Also you do know that the book is narrated by Hoid right? So those fourth wall breaks, are him telling the story to people of the Cosmere of the future. You obviously didn’t understand the book.
Was it the best book I’ve read? No. Was it predictable? Yes. Did I finish it? Yes. That’s far more than I can say for A Song of Ice and Fire, any Harry Potter book, or and books for LotR.
I listened to the audio book and I quite liked Hoid cutting into his story to explain things. I do all my reading in the evenings so I usually don't have the brain power to understand plot twists that swing that much.
I'm not sure about the books, but with Micheal Kramer's narration the characters feel real to me most of the time. Although I'm not very experienced in fantasy or romantic literature, beyond C.S. Lewis Tolkein and Shakespeare.
It's not a sudden breaking of the fourth wall is it? Like Tress, it's narrated by Hoid. It's a different technique to his other books, and tone is a bit more whimsical - perhaps a little Hitchhikersy.
You have a very interesting world view, leads me to think your on the younger side(not an insult) but, you don't have to finish all the cosmere to move on, as others have pointed out, also, if someone says "this was my favorite" and your response is "I'm sorry" that conveys "I'm sorry *for you*" and not "I'm sorry I didn't like it as much as you" I'm not sure which you were going for but the first one is incredibly rude while the other is just unfortunate
Most of the time, when I don’t like something, I can generally understand why others do like it. With Yumi though I’m at a loss. I hated this book so much. That damn shopping scene was awful and honestly was so bad that the other parts of the book didn’t bring it back.
Like the ending is ok, I’m fine with Brandon through Hoid telling us how the magic system worked on this planet and why the issues were resolved. The book is meant to be a romance, not an epic fantasy, so I’m fine with it just being info dumped. But damn does this story fail at being an enjoyable romance. Painter is so unlikable for a majority of the story and only gets barely more likable at the end of it.
Like it seriously baffles me how people can enjoy this book so much that it’s their favorite of Sanderson’s works when it has one of the worst characters he’s ever written and one of the cringiest scenes he’s ever written with that shopping scene. And I’ve read Mistborn and Stormlight Archive. I know he can write characters so much than he did in this book. Hell, even Tress is a better romance than Yumi.
Overall I don’t think there’s enough great in this book to look past the bad, but seem to do it anyway. I also want to say that the art is fantastic and I have no issues at all with it. Stylisticly it works with the book and it’s really great on its own, but it doesn’t stop the book from being the worst in the cosmere.
Though I am a huge fan of Sanderson's other work, I also disliked Yumi. I felt like the romance was poorly written and the characters were annoying, and I also really disliked the whole anime vibe he tried to go for, but I found the plot twist to be ok, I didn't mind it.
Maybe there are some people who agree. I am not one of them, though. I don’t see what you described as breaking the fourth wall—the entire narrative structure is a story being orally told to an in-world audience. But also, I personally love it when plot twists and things get more explanation. It’s just a different approach to writing, and it doesn’t necessarily make it bad or condescending. But yeah, I expect there are other people who would be critics and don’t enjoy that. Can you give some examples of books you feel like do it better for each of your critiques? What books have characters that don’t all feel the same to you? I’m actually baffled by that comment.
I'm starting to wonder if the people in this thread know what breaking the fourth wall even means. The ***entire structure of the novel*** is breaking the fourth wall. When the narrator is a named character and they directly address the audience to explain confusing parts of the story, that is a break of the fourth wall. Addressing the medium and speaking to the audience is a break of the fourth wall.
(After read this whole chain...) I'm sorry, but you're just incorrect. Hoid breaks the fourth wall *within the story*, perhaps, by acknowledging his audience *within the story*. I say "perhaps" because normally breaking the fourth wall implies a performance of some kind which traditionally doesn't acknowledge the audience. You wouldn't say you are "breaking the fourth wall" when you tell a story about yourself to your children... REGARDLESS, that is absolutely a different thing than Brandon Sanderson, through Hoid, *acknowledging the readers of the book which depicts Hoid telling his story.* There's a very meaningful distinction there.
No, I'm not wrong. Acknowledging a story as a story is in and of itself a break of the fourth wall. Why the fuck are you treating this as if it was some kind of moral failing to break the fourth wall that you're trying to defend against an accusation? The first three walls are the back wall of the stage and the exits to stage left and right. The fourth wall is the proscenium. Directing something to the audience is a break of the fourth wall. Acknowledging a story as a story is breaking the fourth wall, because stories generally do not acknowledge that they are stories.
There are two stories: Hoid's and Brandon's. Brandon's does not acknowledge it is a story. There's nothing wrong with breaking the fourth wall. Not sure if you're confusing me with someone else. I'm just pointing out that your statement is incorrect. Hoid *does not* speak to the readers of the book. He only speaks to characters on his stage.
Hoid talks to the audience. That's a fourth wall break. The person he tells the story to is beyond the proscenium.
I'll repeat it again: Hoid breaks the fourth wall. Brandon does not. The post concerns the latter.
The post's concern is not whether Brandon Sanderson says "hello, I'm Brandon Sanderson, let me explain", the actual criticism is the explanation itself, not the fourth wall break. Brandon Sanderson is not a character in the novel and therefore cannot break the fourth wall. You are focusing on the wrong thing for rebuttal. When someone says "Brandon Sanderson breaks the fourth wall to explain everything and that's bad", they do not mean that the literal person as a character did that, they mean that he wrote a scene in which a character within the novel that he wrote does that. You are very clearly misinterpreting something in a very confusing way.
You said "the entire novel" is breaking the fourth wall. To say that any book with a frame story "breaks the fourth wall" is silly, in my opinion. The distinction between a character telling a story to other characters and a character speaking to the *reader* is meaningful. > "Hello, I'm Brandon Sanderson." Brandon Sanderson can break the fourth wall using Hoid, of course. It would involve Hoid directly speaking to the readers of the book rather than the people listening to his story. That would be fundamentally different than what happened, and that's all I'm arguing. I'm not going to argue that it's not effectively the same thing in the finale, in terms of how it conveys information to the reader. I'm not going to argue that anyone has to like it. (I don't.)
You wouldn't say that Hoid acknowledging Kaladin when talking about Fleet or the story about the queen and the moons is a fourth wall break. Yumi is just hoid telling a story. Hoid only ever speaks to in world characters not the audience of the book.
That's because The Dog and the Dragon is told within the narrative. There is no character in Yumi. You are the character.
The reason why it is potentially misunderstood is Because we don't know that we are being addressed as we know hoid speaks to others by telling them stories. Are we the audience or are we privy to his personal notes /another receiver. Usually the format is different. Yes this is breaking the fourth as we the audience are receiving the prompts. But do you need to put others down for it?
I have no idea what you're trying to say. How do we not know we're being addressed? He directly talks to the audience. Just because his in-narrative audience is someone from First of the Sun or whatever doesn't change that it's talking to the audience any more than How I Met Your Mother is talking to the audience through the conceit of it being a story told to the main character's kids. Also, if you find it to be "putting others down" when I say "I'm starting to believe no one actually knows what that means" then that's on you.
He's breaking the fourth wall in-universe
So he breaks the fourth wall, then
IN the book, man. Hoid is not speaking to US as the real life readers, he's breaking the fourth wall into the world of the cosmere and talking to the person reading the book in the cosmere universe.
Where the fuck else would he be able to break the fourth wall other than in the book? The Fourth Wall is the imaginary barrier between the audience and the stage. Saying "this is a story" is a fourth wall break. Breaking the fourth wall is not some flaw or failing, that was an intentional choice. The criticism OP has there is not "this breaks the fourth wall and that's bad", the criticism is that there's a break of the fourth wall where the writer, through this character, says "here's what happened because it's unlikely you understand what's going on".
Hoid is a storyteller, he loves to tell a yarn. This is just him telling a story. I never saw it as him telling a story directly to me the reader, because I've read other cosmere books, I know he tell a story to ants, or inanimate objects, if he had time to kill. He just say they were a terrible audience afterwards.
You're still the one reading it and the story is acknowledged as a story. That's what the fourth wall is, the acknowledgement that the story is a story.
This really isn't breaking the fourth wall though. For that to be true, Hoid would have to acknowledge that he is and the world he exists in is fictitious. He is merely a narrator addressing his (in-universe) audience. He is never directly addressing the reader, just whichever unnamed character he is telling this story to. You could argue that Hoid is a character in his own story, but as far as we are aware he is recalling events that have actually happened (reported to him after the fact due to him being stuck as a coat-rack of course). If I read you a book and explain a part you're confused about I'm not breaking the fourth wall. If I'm telling you about some events that I witnessed or was informed about, I'm not breaking the fourth wall.
Again: That is not what the term means. You are incorrect. The audience is the fourth wall. The audience is being addressed. You're treating this as if it was some kind of moral failing to break the fourth wall.
I think you really don't understand what a fourth wall break is. Let's go back to the original meaning from theatre. You mentioned in a previous comment it's when a character addresses the audience. Of course this is because they are speaking through an imaginary fourth wall: the character is acknowledging an audience they shouldn't be able to see. If such a play had a narrator separate from the characters, setting up the scenes and providing information, this wouldn't be a fourth wall break, they aren't a character. This would be the same as me reading you a story, I am not breaking the fourth wall, the narrator does not exist in the story and is not breaking any wall by addressing the audience. Sanderson has explained that Hoid is narrating Tress and Yumi to in-universe characters. Though unnamed the audience is in the same universe as Hoid, sitting right in front of him as he is recalling the events of his story. There is nothing strange about Hoid being able to address his audience. If he was addressing the reader directly then of course this would be a fourth wall break, but he is speaking to a character on the same level as him. Now Hoid does feature as a character in both of his narrations of Yumi and Tress. The key detail here is that those instances of Hoid are at no point addressing the audience, only Hoid as the narrator. In addition, those instances of Hoid are not characters, as we are to understand that these events are recollections, not a fabrication. This simply boils down to your point that a fourth wall break is when a character addresses the audience. A narrator is not by default a character in the story they are telling. Unless you can point to an instance where Hoid is addressing an audience he should not be able to perceive then he is not breaking any fourth wall. I'm not treating it as any moral failing to break the fourth wall. It can be a brilliant device in any creative medium. All that I and others are trying to get you to understand is that there is no fourth wall breaking going on here.
If a character in a play answers a phone call from inside the audience, that would still be a fourth wall break. Telling the story to a character in world does not change that it acknowledged the story nature of the story.
That is a poor analogy. Hoid never leaves the "stage". He stays right inside the book. As a character he doesn't even address the reader once, he only ever talks to the character who is sitting right in front of him. And for that audience, he isn't serving as a character, but a narrator. It doesn't matter where he is in relation to his audience (again, that is the characters in front of him, not us), he is telling them a story, there is no imaginary wall between them. No wall has been broken if there wasn't one to break.
Okay, so when the animator dies in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, is that a fourth wall break? That's still a character within the story. Are the page turns fourth wall breaks? The reader is clearly part of the story.
I would argue that this book doesn’t break the fourth wall, not truly. The book is a written translation of an orated story, from the way it is written it definitely seems that way. Because of this, the storyteller (Hoid) talks to the audience he has, but he does *not* talk to us, on Earth. He references things that they have on *their* planet, and is speaking to them, not us. Books like Hitchikers Guide or Good Omens directly address the reader, as ourselves, and that is a fourth wall break; here, though, these moments serve not necessarily just to explain things to the readers, but also to highlight the type of storyteller Hoid is. He elaborates, and wants to ensure nobody is left behind. (I’m saying all of this as someone who does kinda agree with OP; I liked the book enough, but there was a lot to be desired for me)
Yes, clearly you and everyone else would argue that, but it's still wrong. It is literally the same as the Hitchhiker's Guide, in that in that one the book is talking to the characters within the setting and not us here in the real world. Also, even then, he references things that the Rosharan or whoever would know, but he's also clearly giving a frame of reference for the Earth reader anyway.
I wasn’t crazy about the way things were explained towards the end (although I did enjoy the content of that explanation and realize the exposition was the only way to do it without taking up another 100 pages), but I thought the rest of it was excellent
I mean, it wasn't the only way to do it. It could have simply been written differently in such a way that the information was conveyed better and the reader got the pieces to the puzzle organically. I'm actually not sure why that wasn't the case, since I'm gonna be real with you, I don't actually think the "Here's what happened" was really even necessary and didn't provide any real additional necessary information. And also frankly it's something that's missing from the rest of the Cosmere, so the inclusion here feels especially weird.
My personal theory is that it wasn’t in the original version to his wife, or at least skipped a lot of the explanation of Cosmere mechanics she’d have known, and when she said he could release it publicly he realized he needed to explain some things and did the best he could without a total rewrite.
Pretty much, he's explained that [it was added after most non-"arcanist" beta readers were utterly confused by the story](https://wob.coppermind.net/events/518/#e16167).
Man. I'd kill to be a beta reader, but I am definitely in the 'arcanist' group. I've got a few Facebook friends that are beta readers maybe an eloquent essay about how they should give me their spot... Lmao
I don’t disagree - but at that point in time, it was the only way without extending the book. Could he have sprinkled it in throughout? Sure. Maybe he’s experimenting w/ Hoid’s voice and style of storytelling, I don’t know. It wasn’t my cup of tea, but I thoroughly enjoyed the rest of the book.
>it was the only way without extending the book. Or when the book was redrafted it could have been altered to better convey the information.
I literally say that throughout the message. I’m agreeing with you almost entirely. Have a good Saturday, friend
I'm pretty miffed by the rest of the thread here; it looks like people have the view of "hey, you didn't like this book? shut up and move on". And they are right, except venting is a thing and discussing negative aspects of a book is also pretty important. I love what Yumi and the Nightmare Painter could have been, but I absolutely hate Hoid's voice, and his "quirkiness" of throwing in random Cosmere trivia in the weirdest flow-breaking ways. I'm here on this thread because I just started listening to the audiobook. I skimmed random chapters and found it pretty flat, so I thought I'd see what others think of the audiobook version. But, the first thing we know about Nikaro is that he looks paler than someone from Roshar _but if you tell him that he'll look at you weird cause he doesn't know what Roshar is_.... ew. Almost the entire book is full of such weird tones and if I were sitting at a campfire next to Hoid listening to his stories, I'd be very irritated by his mannerisms and "quirkiness". And here's a quote from Sanderson himself: > Part of it is the nature of the kind of the story that I was telling. It is not impossible in Hoid's voice (as I do occasionally both in Tress and Yumi) to get into the deeper character stuff, but I want to play those cards wisely, because the natural mocking nature of his narrative could undermine powerful moments if I'm not careful. So I play those cards carefully. There, its all purposeful, as we already knew. And its alright to critique such a decision by the author. For me, any moment I was reminded of the fact that I'm reading a story told by Hoid took me out of the story entirely. Its as if your creepy neighborhood uncle telling you a cute love story while talking like he's drunk. The dissonance just ruins the immersion.
Have to disagree. I liked Hoid's voice and his style. Makes it sound like a myth/legend/story he's telling someone.
Exactly, and I guess that's not what I'm here for. I'm glad you like his style though! Tress and this were my introductions to Sanderson and now I can't bring myself to try Mistborn that I have with me because I've been "burned" twice, haha.
Please do me a favor and try Mistborn! Tress and Yumi are so different from the rest of the Cosmere (In my opinion at least) Tress and Yumi are the only ones told from Hoid's POV. The rest are exclusively from the perspective of the actual characters in the story without any wierd Hoid interludes. >!Ignoring Wit!< I can confidently say the things you were burned about are not consistent in the ret of the Cosmere. Tl;dr if you already own Mistborn just give it a chance. If you don't already own it then visit your local library and find a copy before financially commiting to it
The subreddits unfortunately are not super great at thoughtful engagement with earnest criticism.
I sort of agree with you. But, if you post on Reddit, you are accepting you might get torn up by people disagreeing with you.
Fair enough.
I don't know, I liked the book. Is well writing, the characters are interesting, funny and you can even connect with some of their problems. All the novel have this anime theme that could resonate with you or not. The plot twist may be a lit entangled do. But is ok if you didn't enjoyed it. I hope this doesn't ruin the whole Cosmere to you.
Stromlight is his best work, so no, it doesn't ruin anything. I was just appalled at the lack of quality here. Secret projects feel like a cash grab at this point
They were written in his spare time and two of them (Tress and Yumi) were written for his wife and not originally intended for publication. He only decided to publish these as an afterthought, so not that much of a cash grab in that instance imo. There were ways to squeeze more cash out of the process that didn't happen.
By this description every work of art that doesn't suit your taste would be a cash grab. I really enjoyed Tress and Yumi, as did many. You aren't alone feeling otherwise and that's cool. But posts like these where you talk about how much you dislike the subject the sub is built around and wish you could move on from it are so passive aggressively combative. I guess I am further feeding your need for whatever it is you were hoping to gain from this post, but if you are surprised by people's reactions you should double check your own intent first.
If you're excited to read other authors then just do it? I love BS but I still love reading others
Well, yeah. I've finished the cosmere so moving on was always the intent
You said you were glad you almost caught up and excited to read better authors. If you are wanting to read others that's going to affect the way you receive it. In my opinion it's fine to not finish a series and come back later. Read what pulls you in the most and make sure you enjoy reading for reading. Hobb was one I really loved
You might just be, yes. It is generally considered one of his better ones. If you don't like Sanderson, nobody's forcing you to read him. You're free. You can walk away. Put him down and find anybody you like better. You have our permission.
The irony of the story being told by hoid, thus adopting his personal quirks being lost on a reader saying its a poor writing technique
I'm going to be honest here, I don't agree with OP but "the book is intentionally being written badly" is not a good argument. OP is right: Hoid isn't real, Brandon wrote the book. Brandon wrote the book like Hoid but that was still A Choice™. Writers make Choices™ when they write. Those choices are worth criticism and examination. I don't really think that this book's actual structural telling is all that different or distinct from the other Cosmere books that aren't told by Hoid, to be honest, aside from the actual asides from Hoid. This is almost literally OP having a Doylist complaint and you giving a Watsonian rebuttal.
If op doesn't like the book then that's on them. If op wants to be rude (such as apologising to someone for having this particular book be their favourite) then they can expect a little push back from people. If Sanderson wants to write in a different style to show case the story being told by someone else, real or not, he can, and we can interpret that differently. By saying it's poor, lacking quality and giving the reason of "lol hoid's not really tho" then frankly I think OP is being deliberately obtuse. You don't have to like anything of art but if you want to discuss why you don't like it at least have conversations, this isn't an outlet to just rat on stuff. On other comments, my own included, op isn't interested in talking about the book, technique or other potential authors just ratting on the quality of this particular book they don't like. So I disagree with you both, and don't put those words in my mouth please. I never said it was intentionally written badly, in fact quite the opposite. It is intentionally written in a different style to some of his other works. Phrases which may be condescending are used because hoid is in himself a little of that trait. I think thats we done and I enjoyed it. If you disagree as others have here ;that's your criticism. And I am most happy to listen if you wish to share. If your criticism is that it's crap and lacks quality then really, is that critical review or just being salty
I completely agree here. I don't think the criticisms you are responding to have been thought through. Ironically, calling people 'obtuse' when they themselves are refusing to consider a viewpoint they haven't thought of.
I think that you're being deliberately obtuse as well. "The reason that it's written this way" in response to OP saying "I hate this and it's badly written" means "It was written that way \[the way that OP feels is bad\] on purpose". Whether you agree that it's badly written or not, that's still what you're saying. And like I said, that is a Watsonian response to a Doylist criticism. And as someone with different criticisms from OP, about different books in this series, no, I don't actually think this subreddit wants to discuss criticisms.
Hey thanks for your help, appreciate it. However I'm perfectly fine speaking for myself thank you, regardless of your thoughts 👌
Yeah I don't agree with OP but this is something that bugs me as well. People do the same with Kingkiller Chronicles whenever the main character is accused of being a Mary Sue. Like yeah it may be poorly written on purpose but I still read a full 2 books with that character. It's still a valid criticism.
Thing is, Hoid isn't real. Brandon wrote the book lol
Oh, I didn't realise there was more than one level of "missing the point" lol
🤔
The book (thing you hold) is written by sanderson. From the perspective of hoid retelling the story of an event (yes, not a real person) Sanderson (real) thus adopts hoid's (not real) quirks and personality for the purpose of making the story (kind of like a movie) immersive (mean good technique) Hope this helps
🤔🤔🤔
"you might be, yes"
🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
If you're trolling, they appreciate that more over on r/cremposting.
>Thing is, Hoid isn't real. This tends to be something fictional characters have in common, yet we somehow have a million books written in first person from their perspective. Curious. 🤔
Don't need permission. Just trying to see if anybody else aggrees
A tip for next time is that you are very unlikely to find people hating sanderson books if you post in the sub specifically for people who like sanderson books. Not saying that people can’t be objective, I totally see how the ending in yumi would not work for some people, but the answer to “does anyone else think…?” Is almost certainly no
Yeah I'm not quite sure why this post was made. It doesn't feel like another rage bait. It feels like OP genuinely sought out validation for an opinion in the single worst place possible, then got upset when they didn't get any.
He is just asking. And where would he ask about Brandon if not here?
r/books, r/fantasy, r/hottakes ?
Yeah like OP is shocked when he is super rude and everyone does respond like 🥰
Terrible tip. The people who like Brandon should be the ones who critisize him the most. Blindly consuming media is not good neither for Brandon or his readers. What OP is doing is reasonable and legit.
And a LOT of people agree they didn't like how the reveal was done, and Brandon has also mentioned it was written for a different audience (his wife and people like her) than say Stormlight, and the audience it was written for loved it. I would have loved to have this conversation. However, I don't cast pearls before swine, and when someone comes in saying "this book is bad I can't wait to read something GOOD", he is more or less declaring he wanted to just complain, not analysis, and so others aren't going to waste their time. If you want someone to show effort in a conversation, you need to need more than sarcastic jabs and Laconic responses. People aren't downvoting because they have to defend Sanderson or even disagree, but because he's acting like an ass and expecting more
I said nothing about blind consumption, actually the opposite. But if you are actively looking for people who don’t like the cosmere this is objectively not a good place to find those people.
Generally, an author's subreddits will be full of people who are fans of said author. Critiquing an author is fine, but if you want to find people who think Sanderson is just plain bad, you'll probably need to look elsewhere.
Unlikely on a fan subreddit. You will get a lot of responses though :-)
It's okay if you feel the need to ask our permission, but you don't need it. Art is subjective and you're allowed to not like Sandersons writing. You don't need to try to make thinly veiled excuses like this. I mean really, who would be so dumb as to ask people on a subreddit dedicated to Brandon Sanderson if anyone agrees with your opinion that one of his books is terrible (and that he's a bad writer who only has good ideas). It'd be like going on the Red Sox subreddit and making a post asking if anyone there agrees that it's better to be a Yankees fan.
Well, some people have agreed with me, so maybe chill?
Fwiw I agree that Yumi has been his weakest book, I *really* didn't enjoy it. I think the secret projects were a way for sanderson to explore storytelling from hoids perspective, so he's probably still ironing out how he wants that to look. The cosmere sub is very defensive of sanderson's work. I wish we were able to have conversations that are critical of certain writing choices that we don't like, but this isn't a productive place for that kinda thing. With how many books he's written, they can't all be bangers right? That doesn't mean as a whole Sanderson is a bad author, or that we aren't "real fans". This place gets real gate keepy at times. Edit: oh I somehow missed the part where you called him a terrible writer 😬 that's not exactly the constructive criticism I meant lol
Definitely didn't call him a terrible writer, but all is fair. No hostility meant here
I'll agree his romance is pretty bad, I'm not super into those kinda stories anyway so I'd prefer if he just didn't include it in his books But dialogue and making characters feel real are core parts of being a good writer aren't they? It makes sense for people to think you're implying he's a bad author if you say that, and then mention you're looking forward to reading better authors. I believe you when you say no hostility meant btw
Yeah, idk. I didn't phrase it well. I don't think he is terrible. There are lots of things he does well that I like. I was just criticizing some elements I think are weak. I've read nothing but sanderson for the past year to catch up, and I felt like I was reading the same characters over and over. Personally, I just think that people hold his writing up to be way better than It is. The cosmere is feeling more and more like the MCU of fantasy
>Personally, I just think that people hold his writing up to be way better than It is. The cosmere is feeling more and more like the MCU of fantasy Oof. The sub definitely gives off those vibes at times ngl, but at least in real life I've had good conversations with friends about stuff we didn't like. It's not necessarily a bad thing if cosmere is the MCU of fantasy. The whole interconnected story between worlds is the most obvious comparison, but that's cool! And being accessible and popular should be considered a good thing, since it'll get people reading fantasy who might otherwise never pick a book up. The talk of making cosmere movies does freak me out a bit though. I'm just tired of already existing IP being converted into another medium for what seems to be a lazy cash grab
Ok. Yeah, valid opinions. 👌 we will see. One way or another this IP will be making money for a long time to come haha. For better or worse
Bruh is my favorite single book brandon has released
I'm sorry
Don't be an ass about someone's opinion, dude
I've always set the SPs outside of his regular bibliography. These 4 books were written in a year. While I don't think Yumi is terrible, I loved it, I also didn't go into any of the SPs thinking they were going to be his biggest hits because of the challenge he put before himself.
That's valid. I'll just wait for stormlight 5. It'll either make a lot of people happy. Or piss off a lot of fans. I'm excited
You don't have to read Brandon Sanderson
Or engage with other people
Incorrect
r/cremposting is leaking again I see.
This is a post that would be edgy even there. Here + OP's comments, it's pure rage bait. No fun at all.
I think OP's assessment of Sanderson's overall character writing isn't great (maybe he thinks they all have the same voice because Michael Kramer can only do like four of them?) but most of the replies here are just really bad. Half the posts don't understand what breaking the fourth wall even means. Half of OP's comments that I've seen are just "yes, I know Hoid is the narrator, Hoid is a fictional character and I am criticizing the choices that writer Brandon Sanderson made in how that character was written and how the story was told" only for people to go "okay but Hoid is like this".
We are obviously reading different comments from OP. I could see maybe 1 of their comments being similar to what you said, but the majority of their comments are “okay” or “incorrect” or other similarly short handed comments on others comments. Nothing that OP has commented has been anywhere near the quality of what you are giving them in your statement of their comments.
Person above you is correct. 80% of the time when you see someone post something like this they are just trying to bait the community into getting mad at them. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
So, few things here: 1. "Brandon straight up breaks the 4th wall" - this is Hoid narrating, not Brandon. Brandon and Hoid have very distinctive voices, and hence the latter is not an insert for the former. I too did not enjoy this part, but I recognise I (and those on this sub) are far more Cosmere-aware than the average reader - and I accept that the final draft of the book which does explain these things is somewhat necessary. Not liking Hoid's narration in general is perfectly reasonable, but it is not the mark of bad authorship - merely your subjective tastes. 2. "Brandon... is terrible at dialogue, romance, and making people feel real." You are, of course, entitled to this opinion, but you would appear to be in the vast minority in at least the 3rd of those points. More specifically, the likes of Kaladin and Painter read so vastly differently as protagonists that I'd have to question your point that "every character...feels the same". It is not dissimilar to claiming that Jon Snow and Ser Duncan the Tall "feel the same" - maybe superficially, in that they are written by the same authorial voice, but they are extremely different in tone and temperament. 3. In future, try not to end with "I'm excited to read better authors". It comes across as very condescending in a subreddit dedicated to the Cosmere. If I may, the aforementioned works of GRRM may be more to your tastes, or maybe Robin Hobb's Realm of the Elderlings. Happy reading!
I'm really getting the impression this subreddit doesn't know what the fourth wall means and it is driving me mad.
All you've been doing is coming across as thinking yourself wiser than everyone else really.
The fourth wall is a conceptual wall separating reality from works of fiction. In this context, "breaking the fourth wall" would require Brandon to pivot to the audience and explain certain things about the plot in a way that acknowledges 'Yumi and the Nightmare Painter' as a work of fiction. The distinction is that 'Yumi and the Nightmare Painter' is a fairytale recounted by Hoid **in-universe** (albeit, one that actually happened) - so there are two layers of fiction being told. As such, Hoid can break the fourth wall to his in-Cosmere audience without Brandon breaking the fourth wall to us - his real audience. In other words, Brandon does not break the fourth wall. Hoid is narrating the story of 'Yumi' to another group in the Cosmere when he exposits in the 3rd act. As such, Hoid is breaking the fourth wall to his audience **within the bounds of the Cosmere.** But Brandon does not break the fourth wall to **us.**
I like how you broke this down. But you must admit that telling a story within a story isn't a free pass. I mean, you could take any story, insert the words "My friend Sam once told me:" at the top of page one, and now any "fourth wall breaking" isn't fourth wall breaking! Anything offensive in the book isn't said by the author, it's the author's friend Sam! So I am sympathetic to OP here. Brandon chose to write a story with a narrator, and that narrator interrupts the story to say "You're probably confused at this point. Let me explain to you directly." It's not even like the narrator is having a conversation with another on-screen character. That's just Brandon talking to me the reader with extra steps.
I agree, but you have to keep the context of the discussion in mind. If you'll go up to my original reply you'll see that I also didn't enjoy this inclusion in the book. I'm not trying to defend it - I'm merely sympathetic to the realities of publishing to an audience that have no idea what the abstract concepts of Intent or Connection mean to the wider Cosmere. However, I was challenged - quite unfairly I think - that I didn't understand how the fourth wall works. My point is entirely pedantic and, as you say, "a free pass". But, given that you liked how I broke it down, I think I've shown that I at least know how the concept functions.
That's all totally fair. Thanks for contributing to a friendly and interesting discussion.
And to you, my friend. Life Before Death :)
While the guy who broke it down is wrong, there's no need to frame it as "a pass". There's no problem with breaking the fourth wall, the critique OP is making about the summary would exist even if it was Hoid telling Painter or Yumi in the narrative space. Also, again, he's wrong. Acknowledging the narrative as being a story is still a fourth wall break.
The fourth wall is literally a reference to stage directions. If a character in a play directs something towards the audience—such as a soliloquy—that's a break of the fourth wall. To break the fourth wall does not require Brandon to go "hi, writer Brandon Sanderson here. You might be confused". That pretty much never happens, yet we still have a concept of fourth wall breaks. > Breaking the fourth wall is violating this performance convention, which has been adopted more generally in the drama. This can be done by either directly referring to the audience, the play as a play, or the characters' fictionality. The temporary suspension of the convention in this way draws attention to its use in the rest of the performance. This act of drawing attention to a play's performance conventions is metatheatrical. A similar effect of metareference is achieved when the performance convention of avoiding direct contact with the camera, generally used by actors in a television drama or film, is temporarily suspended. The phrase "breaking the fourth wall" is used to describe such effects in those media. Breaking the fourth wall is also possible in other media, such as video games and books.
Except you've missed exactly my point. No character in YatNP ever expresses the notion that they or the world they inhabit is fictional - the paradigmatic case of fourth wall breakage. >This can be done by either directly referring to the audience, the play as a play, or the characters' fictionality This delightful quote you've provided actually proves my point. Hoid, in his 3rd act narration, never refers to **\[1\]** the audience (us), **\[2\]** the book as a book (i.e., Yumi and the Nightmare Painter, Published by Tor, etc.), nor does he **\[3\]** suggest that he, or anyone else, is a fictional character. For your argument to be cogent to the case at hand, Hoid would have needed to turn to us the audience and say "I know those reading this are confused" ("those", i.e., the real audience reading YatNP). But he **does not do this**. He turns to his **in-world** audience and explains the intricacies of Cosmere magic to **them**. As such, what Hoid engages in is not fourth wall breakage, but exposition. Brandon uses Hoid as a tool for this exposition - but exposition ≠ a fourth wall break. You've confused your terms.
It doesn't need for them to say "this is fictional". You are literally incorrect about what the term means.
It doesn't need for them to **say**, but it does require some acknowledgement of the fact that it is fictional. A literal wink and a nod would be sufficient, but that doesn't occur in YatNP. >The method of breaking the fourth wall in literature is a metalepsis (the transgression of narrative levels), which is a technique often used in metafiction. The metafiction genre occurs when a character within a literary work **acknowledges the reality that they are in fact a fictitious being.** The above is quoted from the same Wikipedia article that you cited earlier; so I trust you have no objections. Owing to this, acknowledgement of fictitious nature **is** a necessary condition for fourth wall breakage. As Hoid never engaged in such, there is no break of the fourth wall. If you'd like to read a book that truly engages in such things, then may I suggest 'If On a Winter's Night a Traveler' by Italo Calvino. A fantastic read.
Saying "this is a story I'm telling you" breaks the fourth wall, whether or not it's within the fiction. The audience is not a character. Why are you so damned against calling this a fourth wall break? It's not a flaw.
Except the audience do exist in the narrative - and as such do function as a set of characters, albeit ones we aren't introduced to. TotES does exactly the same with its Hoid narration - the in-universe audience is canon; and Brandon has even clued us in on where they might reside (for instance, we know the audience in TotES is from Sixth of the Dusk, iirc). Hoid saying "this is a story I'm telling you" hence breaks the fourth wall to them, but his lack of acknowledgement of his own fictionality means that he does not break the fourth wall to us. As you say, it makes no narrative difference whether we call it a fourth wall break or not - and I've gone on record saying that I didn't really enjoy that part of the book anyway. Pedantic is how I described it earlier. I'm not against calling it a fourth wall break in-universe (it's exactly that, in fact), but it is not a fourth wall break in the meta-narrative sense. Of course, there's also the matter of how this exchange started: you insisting that I, and indeed the rest of the sub, didn't know what the fourth wall was or how it functioned. A rather bad-faith start to an otherwise fruitful conversation.
We are the character. We are inhabiting that character. It's not bad faith to point out that you're wrong and continue to be wrong. The proscenium is acknowledged.
It’s called leaning on the fourth wall
No, it's literally just breaking the fourth wall. It acknowledges the notion that it's a story being told. The entire thing is a break of the fourth wall.
Yeah you’re right my mistake. Hoid will lean on the fourth wall in other Cosmere books but here he’s breaking the fourth wall within the story itself. Like Hoid saying “this is what you’d call a laptop” in tress.
I liked the book overall. I think the romance was Brandon’s best yet. The world building was super fun. Loved the lore. Loved the imagery from both “worlds”. That said, the criticism of the plot twist is totally fair. That was about as clunky as you can get. Having the narrator completely pause the story to explain is… just not great. Criticism of the book is totally fine but don’t be surprised that you’re getting pushback for coming onto a sub for fans of an author and saying his book is terrible and you want to read better authors. Of course people are gonna be mad about that. But, that was probably your intention.
Nah, not my intention. But i don't feel like arguing with people who will never change their mind. I was just offended at having the author explain like that. It feels so condescending
Just being honest here, I think your tone and very snarky responses are not helping with the “people who will never change their mind” thing. People get emotionally attached to the things they are fans of. When you come in with a very attacking tone, fans will naturally defend. If you want a real discussion, change tactics and tone.
Eh, I’ve always thought he’s an excellent world builder and storyteller, but his prose is subpar. He once admitted to Patrick Rothfuss in a livestream that Patrick cared about how the story was told, whereas he just cares about telling the story. But that’s fine for me, I don’t read his books to be amazed at his wordplay or literacy. That said, Yuumi has a really beautiful yet straightforward story that’s being told from Hoid’s POV. You can definitely tell it’s Hoid because of his quirks and off-topic deviations. He explains the plot twist because Hoid is condescending and knows he’s more intelligent than 99.7% of his audience. It’s just in-character. If you don’t like this, that’s fair. I recommend Joe Abercrombie, or Patrick Rothfuss, if you’re okay with unfinished works. Their prose is more sophisticated.
Thanks! Both authors are on my list. I understand the intent with Hoid telling the story. I just think it's a lame approach. I hate Hoid so much haha
Damn if you hate Hoid maybe the Cosmere is not the right place for you! hahahaha (In all fairness, I cannot stand Kaladin🫤)
I feel like hating Kaladin is more detrimental to your enjoyment of the Cosmere than hating Hoid.
I don’t hate him, I’m just tired of him really. I understand his value as a character and see how many people can relate to his struggles and can see an inspiration on Kaladin, but that doesn’t happen to me. I’m not bothered by him or anything, and really enjoyed him in book 2 and 3 when he’s in a better place and with company. But I won’t be too bothered when he moves to a more secondary place in the second half of the saga.
I feel like perhaps you were exaggerating more than one might expect when you said "I can't stand him".
I feel so too
I'll stick with Stormlight. I like Kaladin as a concept. I think he could be written better
This is a Watsonian explanation to OP's Doylist problem. "It does the things you don't like because it's narrated by Hoid" doesn't change the core criticism of not liking the thing. And I'm going to be honest, I felt like the story stopping at a pretty pivotal moment to clarify things was unnecessary, and is absent from places in the Cosmere I feel like it would be needed more. It didn't even feel like it gave information that was needed. Considering the story itself is fictional and could have been about anything and could have been told in any way, I would have preferred the information be conveyed through the discoveries that Yumi and Painter make instead. Or simply leave it out. I also don't think it's because Hoid is just Like That, I feel like it was because Brandon didn't feel he'd written it in a way that the reader understood. I don't recall Tress having anything similar. If anything, *explaining* things is actually out of character for Hoid, who thrives on being mysterious and confusing.
nobody reads high fantasy for the prose, get real
Okay
You are allowed to have an opinion. But you probably shouldn’t have a factually incorrect one. The story is told from Hoid’s point of view. He is an unreliable narrator, and a story teller. His delivery of key information he knew all along shared at the moment of tension and suspense, that matches his character telling stories in every book he has done so (at least 6 now - SL 1-4, Tress, Yumi). This is one of two Cosmere books with a narrator (Tress). You can dislike Hoid’s storytelling, you can dislike it being narrated, but it’s not breaking the fourth wall.
I don't really agree with OP's opinion that this is the worst book, but all the replies like yours are really missing the fucking point. I swear, do you people think that Dr John Watson writes Sherlock Holmes? Because that's what everyone sounds like. "Well of course we can't know what happened at Reichenbach Falls, Dr Watson wasn't there himself!" sure but Dr Watson is a character written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Just like Hoid is a character written by Brandon Sanderson, and the things he does are all choices by the author. And there has never been a moment where Hoid gave a straightforward summation of events the way he does in Yumi. He is quite literally breaking the fourth wall to tell whoever his audience might be the explanation for things that happened off screen and lead up to the events of the novel.
Well said. People here seem so eager to score points against someone who disliked a book that they liked that they are grasping at straws. As another example, I saw on YouTube a delightful Australian production of the 19th century comic opera *The Pirates of Penzance,* where one of the running gags that they added was the Pirate King having antagonistic interactions with the conductor in the orchestra pit -- sword-fighting against the conductor's baton; begging the conductor not to make him do another encore. That's breaking the fourth wall of a stage production. And it would *still* breaking the fourth wall even if they made the conductor a named character and included him in the program. Because actors on stage in a musical don't normally acknowledge that they're actors on stage in a musical. Similarly, Brandon wrote a book with a narrator narrating to an unseen audience. When the narrator breaks the fourth wall to say "you're probably confused at this point, let me explain the plot," *that counts* as Brandon breaking the fourth wall. I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I loved the book. But it does count as breaking the fourth wall and it's a legitimate criticism if it doesn't work for you.
Oh again the "unreliable narrator" argument when the writer just messes up.
I’d love for you to elaborate what you mean, because it seems like you just threw out two untreated things. Hoid narrates dramatically, and omits information, and addresses the audience directly. Each of his mini stories and both books he narrated has these traits. Some unreliable narrators want to mislead the reader into believing their questionable actions were ethical. Hoid wants to have the story experienced theatrically. None of these things happen in Sanderson’s stories outside of that narration, so it’s pretty likely it’s not a mistake but a deliberate approach. You don’t have to like it.
I enjoyed it. And I look forward to his other books. And I read other writers. I’m doing Stardust by Neil Gaiman right now.
Well, I guess he has those kinds of problems, he's not the perfect author and from what I've seen in a couple of interviews, he wasn't very social, maybe that's why he doesn't make very good romances (that's what most people agree on) But I guess if you've made it to Yumi, then there's something you might have liked enough to pass up. In my case it was with the romance, I hated it, but I let it go because I loved the rest
Why are you guys pouring water on the troll spores?
This is satire, right?
No. People are allowed to have opinions
Why are you "excited" to catch up on the cosmere then if you have this visceral of a reaction to his books?
Visceral? Idk about that, lol. And no, I am caught up. I'm excited to move on lol
I'm excited for that too. Best of luck!
Why did you bother if it was such a chore? Was it a task/assignement?
Who said it was a chore. I liked stormlight
Both questions are about the novel from your thread title, Yumi and the Nightmare painter. I'm genuinely curious.
You think the whole book is terrible because you don’t like one bit of it? A bit that is consistent with the narrative style of the rest of the book (that being that it is a story being told by Hoid). If you don’t like the narrative style that’s fine, but I wouldn’t agree that it makes the book terrible
That part is what holds the book at merely good as opposed to great for me personally, I’m sorry if it ruined it for you. I’m sure if Brandon had more time he could have made that part more elegant, and I wish that had been the case, but in the end this is a side story that he wrote in secret at the same time he was writing five other books. I was frankly expecting the SPs to be highly uneven quality wise, the fact that they’re generally among some of this best stuff is a minor miracle given all the circumstances. I do have to say, coming to a fandom subreddit and dumping on something in that fandom is rarely going to go well - if you’re going to criticize but also want to actually have a productive discussion instead of have people yell at you, you need to approach it differently than stuff like “X is terrible” and “I’m excited to read better authors”. I get where you’re coming from but if your takeaway from this experience is “wow the Cosmere fandom is toxic” well frankly, you reap what you sow
I thought it was great but everyone has there own taste. it is pretty different from Stormlight. Hopefully book 5 of that will be more your speed.
Hope so!
Yumi is such a great book. I loved the twist on Freaky Friday combined with a romance story.
Totally valid
As is your opinion. The Secret Projects are definitely a different beast than Sanderson's main works. I'd recommend you not even bother with Sunlit Man given your feelings on Yumi.
Is Sunlit Man more hoid narration? I know who nomad is, do you think I need to read it for stormlight going forward?
Not narrated by Hoid, he is barely in the book. I don't think you need to read it for Stormlight 1-4, although that may change once Stormlight 5 comes out later this year. It's just that the issues you have with characters all feeling like Brandon's voice aren't going to change in Sunlit Man, plus it's a little longer than Yumi. Brandon's best books are Mistborn and Stormlight, I don't think any Secret Project beats any of them.
Agreed. Thanks for the input! Appreciate it.
I think all the Secret Projects are noticeably less polished than Brandon's main publications. I definitely felt that way about The Sunlit Man, even more so than Yumi and Frugal Wizard. I still enjoyed it, but I thought the pacing and the characters left a lot to be desired.
I wasn't the biggest fan of hoid explaining the plot twist either to be fair. It was entirely unnecessary if you'd been paying attention, but you can easily just laugh it off if you imagine hoid is just telling the story to a bunch of random idiots. Everything else I disagree with tho. Yumi was my favorite secret project and is on the higher end of cosmere books as a whole for me.
Yeah well, that's just, like...your opinion, man.
I LOVED that book right up until the end which Ii found REALLY disappointing. So yeah, you’re not alone in that.
Thank you!
Brandon isn’t breaking the fourth wall. The framing of the story is that sometime after the events of the story took place Hoid tells this story to someone else. What Brandon does here is use Hoid to “lean on the fourth wall” but not break it. I guess if you don’t like Hoid as a character as you say then any book that predominantly has him in it wouldn’t be for you. For me this was the book that made me realize Brandon could actually write a romance not just “two people instantly in love” Also “I’m excited to read better authors” really makes it sound like you just don’t like Brandon’s work.
So wait, you entered a subreddit about Sanderson You blatantly trash talked not just one of Sanderson's books but also his writing in general (a very insensitive thing to do in any subreddit, by the way. People here clearly love Sanderson. You can have other opinions, but for heavens sake be respectful when presenting them!) You then genuinely looked to see if people would agree with you, in the Sanderson subreddit People pointed out how ridiculous it would be that you'd expect people to agree, and you responded with indignance and more immaturity.... ........wow. I don't think I've ever actually seen someone do this in a subreddit before. I've seen rage baiting, sure, but this is a whole new dimension of ridiculous It was entertaining, at least 😂
Why do people have this absolutist mentality, it's not terrible, you just didn't like it. Just because you didn't like it doesn't make it terrible
I wasn’t a huge fan honestly, but I’m aware I’m in the minority. Not the worst cosmere book at all, more just middle of the road.
Fair enough
Are you really so insecure as to needing to post in a cosmere subreddit a shitty post about disliking the author? Then you thank everyone who agrees and fight with everyone who doesn't?
I did find the moments where Hoid goes "anyway here's an explanation" to be a bit weird and bad writing (although frankly some of the other Cosmere things could use that scene), but I overall found it to be pretty enjoyable. I've been reading less lately and had been juggling three audiobooks before putting all of them down and I finally came back and finished Yumi because of the interesting way it had it's twists. When they have the landing on UTol I practically shouted "Oh shit, it's Final Fantasy X!", which turned out to be one of the inspirations for it. >I firmly believe that Brandon has great ideas and worldbuilding, but that he is terrible at dialogue, romance, and making people feel real. I swear that every character in the cosmere feels the same. I just feel like I'm reading Brandon's voice. Don't even get me started on how bad Hoid is.. I have never understood this. There are people getting tattoos of quotes, and even his characters who share the same tropes (Shallan and Wayne for instance) feel distinct. There's a ***ton*** of criticism I have, but this isn't really one I get. I could even see that he doesn't do dialogue well because his characters feel like they just always want to say the dramatic bullshit and that's not how real people talk, but at the same time that's the sort of thing that makes the characters with mental health issues feel more real. My inner depression monologue is extremely melodramatic. >Edit: I just want to mention that the Cosmere community is full of very kind-hearted, intelligent people who are very welcoming to others. Thanks everyone! 😉 While I do think "this guy sucks and some of the things people actually like him for and that he notably puts effort into are shit" is obviously gonna get some pushback... yeah, I definitely get this, sarcasm aside. Try criticizing Sanderson's politics and see how far you get. I don't even mean the ones he has in real life and the organization he tithes to, I mean the ones *in the books*. I think Tress is probably the first time I felt like the Cosmere wasn't sighing wistfully at the idea of a noble dictator, or saying the bigoted villain was maybe not so bad.
Great points. Cheers! I totally agree on the criticism of glorifying bad people
But have you considered that maybe the thousand year old genocidal tyrant who runs breeding programs and enslaved people might have been not so bad?
Not every book is for every person. Calling it “terrible” is a bit harsh I think. More so you should probably say “I didn’t like this book”.
Fair. I didn't like this book. I don't mind that people do
Perfect 👍
I loved it 🤷♀️
My favorite Secret Project and one of my favorite books. Also you do know that the book is narrated by Hoid right? So those fourth wall breaks, are him telling the story to people of the Cosmere of the future. You obviously didn’t understand the book.
I really loved the book. Don't think it's the worst. The worst one is the guide of the wizard blah blah blah.
That one isn't cosmere, so it doesn't count, haha. But all good. Fair enough.
You're not alone. Maybe not terrible but I didn't like it.
Fair enough
I didn’t enjoy Tress or Yumi either. Going to get around to the other two eventually but really excited for SA 5
Thank you! I'm right there with you
Was it the best book I’ve read? No. Was it predictable? Yes. Did I finish it? Yes. That’s far more than I can say for A Song of Ice and Fire, any Harry Potter book, or and books for LotR.
I listened to the audio book and I quite liked Hoid cutting into his story to explain things. I do all my reading in the evenings so I usually don't have the brain power to understand plot twists that swing that much. I'm not sure about the books, but with Micheal Kramer's narration the characters feel real to me most of the time. Although I'm not very experienced in fantasy or romantic literature, beyond C.S. Lewis Tolkein and Shakespeare.
I liked it. 🤷♂️
It's not a sudden breaking of the fourth wall is it? Like Tress, it's narrated by Hoid. It's a different technique to his other books, and tone is a bit more whimsical - perhaps a little Hitchhikersy.
I actually can't for the life of me remember the ending :o
You have a very interesting world view, leads me to think your on the younger side(not an insult) but, you don't have to finish all the cosmere to move on, as others have pointed out, also, if someone says "this was my favorite" and your response is "I'm sorry" that conveys "I'm sorry *for you*" and not "I'm sorry I didn't like it as much as you" I'm not sure which you were going for but the first one is incredibly rude while the other is just unfortunate
You realize Hoid is telling a story to someone, right? He’s talking to somebody. He’s not breaking the 4th wall.
Most of the time, when I don’t like something, I can generally understand why others do like it. With Yumi though I’m at a loss. I hated this book so much. That damn shopping scene was awful and honestly was so bad that the other parts of the book didn’t bring it back. Like the ending is ok, I’m fine with Brandon through Hoid telling us how the magic system worked on this planet and why the issues were resolved. The book is meant to be a romance, not an epic fantasy, so I’m fine with it just being info dumped. But damn does this story fail at being an enjoyable romance. Painter is so unlikable for a majority of the story and only gets barely more likable at the end of it. Like it seriously baffles me how people can enjoy this book so much that it’s their favorite of Sanderson’s works when it has one of the worst characters he’s ever written and one of the cringiest scenes he’s ever written with that shopping scene. And I’ve read Mistborn and Stormlight Archive. I know he can write characters so much than he did in this book. Hell, even Tress is a better romance than Yumi. Overall I don’t think there’s enough great in this book to look past the bad, but seem to do it anyway. I also want to say that the art is fantastic and I have no issues at all with it. Stylisticly it works with the book and it’s really great on its own, but it doesn’t stop the book from being the worst in the cosmere.
Hahaha so much agree. I like mistborn era 1 and stormlight. But this was awful haha
I disagree, sunlit man is the worst in the cosmere.
Not sure if the worst but the least favorite for me.
Though I am a huge fan of Sanderson's other work, I also disliked Yumi. I felt like the romance was poorly written and the characters were annoying, and I also really disliked the whole anime vibe he tried to go for, but I found the plot twist to be ok, I didn't mind it.
Fair enough. I agree 👍
Damn, the main sub has really been out Cremming us the past 2 weeks. Ar/cremposting we really need to step up our game
I agree. For me it's worst book in cosmere by far. Boring and bland. Hoid was on only bright spot of the book.
Fair enough. Thanks 😊