Warbreaker - A commentary
I'm a bit mixed on this novel. I'll go ahead and list the really petty reasons right off.
1) It's one of the first e-books I've read and I still haven't gotten used to the idea of not having a solid copy. It's harder to sit and read for hours when the screen makes your eyes hurt and you can't easily reposition yourself due to the bulkier nature of said electronic device.
2) Despite Brandon Sanderson's assurance that the novel had been proofread thoroughly there were multiple glaring errors on every page. I do not exaggerate. Normally I don't harp on this kind of thing because, as I said, I think it's petty. This is one occasion where I feel I must.
Now that that's out of the way I will enumerate the good points.
First, the setting is certainly very different from what I am used to. Most authors I read go one of two routes as far as religion goes. They either 1) stray away from trying to get too creative with it and go with a classical Good/Evil-Light/Dark scenario or 2) do polytheistic pantheons like you might find in a setting of Dungeons and Dragons. Sanderson does neither of these. To understand the religious conflicts such as they are in the story we must first look at the magic system that is the driving force behind the story.
Breath and Color.
It is a bit strange at first, especially considering the way the author introduces the idea. Breath works how most people imagine a soul would. Everybody has one and, as is often the case in darker settings, they can be lost and in this case gained. Breath can be used for a variety of things, such as seeing Color more clearly. I won't ruin things by delving into this too deeply. Suffice it to say that it is an intriguing idea and the uses and sanctity of Breath and Color are what serve to divide people along religious lines.
Second, there was no "villain." Often there is one bad guy that the heroes are out to thwart. Good novels either play this out well by giving characters very good motivation, or they try to place every character into a situation where they do what they think they must to survive. Keeping away from the tired "there's a villain, let's go kill him" is what makes a series like George R. R. Martin's "A Song of Fire and Ice" good. Sanderson does a great job of explaining the motivations of his characters as duty or survival and there is never an obligatory "bad guy." Certainly there are villains, but they aren't the textbook evil wizards in dark towers plotting mindless destruction. They have depth and motivation and you like them.
The third point is where I will begin to quibble about things. This one is both positive and negative. Mysterious characters. They are very necessary to a story. If all of the characters were two-dimensional or you found out everything about them early on then you would put the book down (unless you like trashy romance or repetitive western novels). However, while you want to keep the reader guessing, enigma is something that must be played out rather particularly. Reveal too much and risk the character becoming boring. Too little and you frustrate the reader (or maybe it's just me). Sanderson does a respectable job of maintaining a balance here, but gives too little. The difference here becomes the reader saying "I want to know more!" and asking "What the hell was that?" A few more lines in the right places and I would have been enthralled rather than disappointed in certain characters. That said, some of them are very intriguing.
Another mixed feeling is about the direction of the plot. Twists and surprises are great. A book that can keep me guessing is one I am almost sure to enjoy. Sanderson does indeed keep the reader guessing. Maybe a little too much. The end of the book totally blindsided me. It was almost enough for me to rethink bitching about the things below, but the story really could have done with more fleshing out and it wouldn't compromise the ending.
There are some bad points.
The worst of these has to be that the author doesn't give enough background. I understand that it is the first book of the series and much more will be revealed as the story progresses, but there are things I feel I should have gotten out of the first book that I didn't get from "Warbreaker." History and geography are the more gaping holes in the setting. Only three kingdoms are important in the story. It isn't so strange to focus on one or two more important lands in a story, but that's assuming you are going to stick to them. Several other kingdoms are mentioned by characters but you find out nothing about them. You have to wonder why they were even brought up when they are just as quickly dismissed. Not only do they bear no weight in the story, but you don't even get a sense of the geography of the world. The closest approximation without a map, using only the story, is that the three kingdoms run north-south, one is in the mountains, and one or two abut an ocean.
The historical gaps are a little more forgivable. Some of them are necessary to the story and are in themselves motivating factors for strife. However, the recent history in the story (the last few hundred years) is so unclear as to be confusing. There was a rebellion over something and now years later we still have no resolution and no one really knows why, etc.... Pretty lame. Maybe further along in the story those facts will be important, but I doubt it. I think this is a part of the story the author didn't really put much thought into because it wasn't too terribly important and he just wanted to get moving.
Another problem is character inconsistency. I have been accused of just not liking female characters, but I think the problem is more in male authors having no flair for writing female roles. Characters shouldn't go from completely terrified to amazingly courageous in the space of days (or less). Growth takes time. Desperation is one thing but it is limited and usually only explains acts, not character growth. Several of the main characters are female and I felt only one had any measure of consistency.
Well, that's about all I can think of at the moment. As for how I would rate the book I would have to say that I enjoyed it, if only for the novelty. The world and the characters are interesting, even if you don't find out as much about them as you would like. The end was kind of a cop-out, but it is the rare ending that I think is done well so maybe the surprise won't be so bad for other people.
As for how I think our young friend will do with "A Memory of Light," I am optimistic. Aside from Egwene I don't think many of the female characters have changed so much as to merit my harping on inconsistency. The action in both books is about even and I think Sanderson might even do better (as far as the hack-and-slash goes, deception and intrigue maybe not so much). My experience here is that a new author picking up a series can bring a welcome change from things that might have gotten stale (The random encounter between Rand's forces and 10,000 Trollocs that took minutes to clear up in "A Knife of Dreams" is a perfect example of something that could have been left out). All in all I think Sanderson is a good pick, but who am I kidding, I'll read the last book no matter who writes it.
1) It's one of the first e-books I've read and I still haven't gotten used to the idea of not having a solid copy. It's harder to sit and read for hours when the screen makes your eyes hurt and you can't easily reposition yourself due to the bulkier nature of said electronic device.
2) Despite Brandon Sanderson's assurance that the novel had been proofread thoroughly there were multiple glaring errors on every page. I do not exaggerate. Normally I don't harp on this kind of thing because, as I said, I think it's petty. This is one occasion where I feel I must.
Now that that's out of the way I will enumerate the good points.
First, the setting is certainly very different from what I am used to. Most authors I read go one of two routes as far as religion goes. They either 1) stray away from trying to get too creative with it and go with a classical Good/Evil-Light/Dark scenario or 2) do polytheistic pantheons like you might find in a setting of Dungeons and Dragons. Sanderson does neither of these. To understand the religious conflicts such as they are in the story we must first look at the magic system that is the driving force behind the story.
Breath and Color.
It is a bit strange at first, especially considering the way the author introduces the idea. Breath works how most people imagine a soul would. Everybody has one and, as is often the case in darker settings, they can be lost and in this case gained. Breath can be used for a variety of things, such as seeing Color more clearly. I won't ruin things by delving into this too deeply. Suffice it to say that it is an intriguing idea and the uses and sanctity of Breath and Color are what serve to divide people along religious lines.
Second, there was no "villain." Often there is one bad guy that the heroes are out to thwart. Good novels either play this out well by giving characters very good motivation, or they try to place every character into a situation where they do what they think they must to survive. Keeping away from the tired "there's a villain, let's go kill him" is what makes a series like George R. R. Martin's "A Song of Fire and Ice" good. Sanderson does a great job of explaining the motivations of his characters as duty or survival and there is never an obligatory "bad guy." Certainly there are villains, but they aren't the textbook evil wizards in dark towers plotting mindless destruction. They have depth and motivation and you like them.
The third point is where I will begin to quibble about things. This one is both positive and negative. Mysterious characters. They are very necessary to a story. If all of the characters were two-dimensional or you found out everything about them early on then you would put the book down (unless you like trashy romance or repetitive western novels). However, while you want to keep the reader guessing, enigma is something that must be played out rather particularly. Reveal too much and risk the character becoming boring. Too little and you frustrate the reader (or maybe it's just me). Sanderson does a respectable job of maintaining a balance here, but gives too little. The difference here becomes the reader saying "I want to know more!" and asking "What the hell was that?" A few more lines in the right places and I would have been enthralled rather than disappointed in certain characters. That said, some of them are very intriguing.
Another mixed feeling is about the direction of the plot. Twists and surprises are great. A book that can keep me guessing is one I am almost sure to enjoy. Sanderson does indeed keep the reader guessing. Maybe a little too much. The end of the book totally blindsided me. It was almost enough for me to rethink bitching about the things below, but the story really could have done with more fleshing out and it wouldn't compromise the ending.
There are some bad points.
The worst of these has to be that the author doesn't give enough background. I understand that it is the first book of the series and much more will be revealed as the story progresses, but there are things I feel I should have gotten out of the first book that I didn't get from "Warbreaker." History and geography are the more gaping holes in the setting. Only three kingdoms are important in the story. It isn't so strange to focus on one or two more important lands in a story, but that's assuming you are going to stick to them. Several other kingdoms are mentioned by characters but you find out nothing about them. You have to wonder why they were even brought up when they are just as quickly dismissed. Not only do they bear no weight in the story, but you don't even get a sense of the geography of the world. The closest approximation without a map, using only the story, is that the three kingdoms run north-south, one is in the mountains, and one or two abut an ocean.
The historical gaps are a little more forgivable. Some of them are necessary to the story and are in themselves motivating factors for strife. However, the recent history in the story (the last few hundred years) is so unclear as to be confusing. There was a rebellion over something and now years later we still have no resolution and no one really knows why, etc.... Pretty lame. Maybe further along in the story those facts will be important, but I doubt it. I think this is a part of the story the author didn't really put much thought into because it wasn't too terribly important and he just wanted to get moving.
Another problem is character inconsistency. I have been accused of just not liking female characters, but I think the problem is more in male authors having no flair for writing female roles. Characters shouldn't go from completely terrified to amazingly courageous in the space of days (or less). Growth takes time. Desperation is one thing but it is limited and usually only explains acts, not character growth. Several of the main characters are female and I felt only one had any measure of consistency.
Well, that's about all I can think of at the moment. As for how I would rate the book I would have to say that I enjoyed it, if only for the novelty. The world and the characters are interesting, even if you don't find out as much about them as you would like. The end was kind of a cop-out, but it is the rare ending that I think is done well so maybe the surprise won't be so bad for other people.
As for how I think our young friend will do with "A Memory of Light," I am optimistic. Aside from Egwene I don't think many of the female characters have changed so much as to merit my harping on inconsistency. The action in both books is about even and I think Sanderson might even do better (as far as the hack-and-slash goes, deception and intrigue maybe not so much). My experience here is that a new author picking up a series can bring a welcome change from things that might have gotten stale (The random encounter between Rand's forces and 10,000 Trollocs that took minutes to clear up in "A Knife of Dreams" is a perfect example of something that could have been left out). All in all I think Sanderson is a good pick, but who am I kidding, I'll read the last book no matter who writes it.