/lit/ - Literature

So I started reading Mistborn after reading through the entirety of Stormlight (as much as is released at least). I never understood the criticism of Sandersons prose up until now.
I found the way he describes his prose, as a clear window through which one witnessess the story, to be quite acurate.
I understood this to be a "naturalistic" approach to storytelling, meaning that the quality of the art improves as the presence of the author in the perception of the reader decreases.
And I would make the case that for stormlight, this principle applies, I experience the story with minimal distraction by way of writing.
His prose, his usage of words was a bit unfamiliar at first, but, after a short while, it had the effect intended by the author, namely creating an image in the head of the reader as efficiently as viable.
But with Mistborn, it is easy to see that Sanderson wasn't the master of his own philosophy quite yet. While I still enjoy the story for what it is, I find myself then and again distracted by out of place description, that are either too technical or don't mesh well with the spoken parts of the story.
And while it isn't damning, it makes me wish that Sanderson had developed his particular style in private, while sticking to a more middle of the road approach until he had all of the kinks worked out.

>>11414567
>>11414627
Oh dear.

>>11278621
Ska aren't human.