In this week’s episode, we look at the hit piece WIRED magazine published about popular fantasy author Brandon Sanderson, and four lessons this offers for indie authors.
TRANSCRIPT
00:00:00 Introduction and Writing Updates
Hello everyone. Welcome to Episode 152 of the Pulp Writer Show. My name is Jonathan Moeller. Today is March the 31st, 2023, and today we’re going to talk about four lessons for indie authors from the recent hit piece Wired magazine did on Brandon Sanderson. If you hear a faint drumming that is in the background, I’m afraid that is the sound of rain hitting the roof. It is raining quite forcefully here. It seems like this year, March has come in like a lion and is leaving like a wetter, angrier lion. But before we get into our main topic, let’s have some updates on my current writing projects and a few questions and comments from readers.
First up, the first audiobook in the Dragonskull Series, Dragon Skull: Sword of the Squire, is now available at most of the audiobook stores. You can get it as of right now at Audible, Apple, Amazon, Kobo, Google Play, Scribd, Chirp Books, and my Payhip store. So that was the first one. Nine hours long, excellently recorded by Brian Wills. And get it there. And we are just starting work on the next one, Dragon Skull Shield of the Knight. For books and not audiobooks, I am 51,000 words into Cloak of Dragonfire, which puts me on Chapter 9 of 21, though I’m pretty sure it is going to be more than 21 chapters because some of the chapters I’ve already written have turned out to be quite long and I will need to split them up in the editing process. If all goes well, I am hoping to have that book out sometime in early May, if all goes well. Then after that’s done, I’ll start on the next Dragonskull book, Dragon Skull: Doom of the Sorceress.
00:01:52 Reader Questions/Comments
Let’s have a couple of comments and questions from readers. Our first question is from Helen, who asks: Hi, Jon. Probably quite a random question, but did you ever return to the Third Soul world? I just finished reading both omnibus sets and suddenly thought that must there been any more. Did this world get left behind? Just interested really no pressure to write a new one.
Thanks, Helen. I’m glad you enjoyed those books. I am sorry to say that I never did return to the Third Soul world. The problem is I think I wrote the initial Third Soul stuff all the way back in oh, 2008, 2009. I’m pretty sure it’s 2009. So that’s 14 years that have passed and I look back in now and I think, oh, I should have done this different, I should have done that different. So if I ever do return to the Third Soul world, that would probably be as a reboot or a different set of characters or continuity at this point, just because so much time has passed and it is a very interesting world. I’d like to explore some of the concepts there more, but I’m afraid I just never quite got around to it.
Our next comment is from Ryan, who writes: been looking forward to the next Nadia book for a while. Super excited to see where the series goes next. On a side note, I recently started reading Silent Order. Not entirely sure why I never gave you a try before, but now I had something caught my eye that I realized you do with all your series. The first book was free. So I said why not, right? The second book was $0.99. That’s almost free, so why not? That wasn’t until after I already purchased the third book that I realized it was $5.99. I’m not complaining that you’re making a living, just marveling that works so well, even though I know you did it before. Anyway, keep all your books coming. I haven’t read one I didn’t like yet.
Thanks, Ryan. I’m glad you have enjoyed the books and that you are enjoying the Silent Order series. I do use that sort of funnel pricing for a lot of my series where the first book is free, the second book is $0.99, and then the third one and all the ones after that are full price ($4.99 USD and then whatever the equivalent is in your country of residence). The reason I do it is, as Ryan observed, it works and I also I also think it’s fair that way because between the free first book and the $0.99 second book, people usually have two full books to read and for not a lot of money to decide whether my work is worth your time and money or not. I am always grateful that as many people continue reading after the second book as they do.
00:04:09 Main Topic of the Week: Wired Article About Brandon Sanderson
So our main topic this week is that the big news in the world of traditional science fiction and fantasy publishing over the last week of March was that Wired magazine ran a hit piece on popular fantasy author Brandon Sanderson. The thesis of the article was Sanderson’s fans love his books, which are written at a 6th grade level and this is bad, which as a thesis is weak for reasons which we will explore more shortly. Additionally, the article included numerous odd personal insults aimed at Sanderson, his family, his employees, the state of Utah, Mormons, and fantasy readers in general. The tone of the article was like Brandon Sanderson decided to run for the President of the United States and the journalist in question considered this a bad thing and so proceeded to write a hit piece to make him look sinister.
Many formerly popular governors and senators who decided to run for president have been surprised to find themselves on the business end of this treatment from previously friendly journalists. The most famous example I can think of off the top of my head was probably Senator John McCain in 2008 when he ended up running against President Obama. Except Sanderson isn’t running for president or any elective office. He’s just selling his books and his merchandise to people who want to read the books and buy the merchandise. There are much worse ways to get rich, and despite the journalist’s best efforts in the article, Sanderson comes across pretty well, a friendly guy with nerdy hobbies who likes his work and doesn’t have any nasty dark secrets like a cocaine problem or a secret dog fighting ring. The fact that the journalist found this “lame and boring” is probably more reflection on the journalist than the subject of his article.
Well, the reaction to the article was almost universally negative, which was interesting. The negative reaction broke down in five main ways. The majority were fans of Sanderson’s books, who, as you imagine, were outraged. However, a substantial minority was lefty leaning science fiction writers and readers who often aren’t fans of Sanderson’s books, or Mormons in general, but were still annoyed because the article was so bad and stumbled into attacking all fantasy readers in a couple of different places. Another substantial minority were people who had never heard of Brandon Sanderson’s books, but noticed the article trending on their social media feeds and were taken aback by how bad and one sided it was. A much smaller minority who thought the article was interesting but seriously flawed. And finally, the usual Internet crackpots connecting the article to unrelated topics like the CIA, various former presidents, the Russia/Ukraine war, etc. The long term result of this article, of course, will be nothing whatsoever. The Brandon Sanderson publishing juggernaut will continue unhindered. Wired magazine will remain a shadow of its glory days in the ‘90s and a semi-failing subsidiary of Conde Nest and the Internet outrage machine will move and has already moved several times to new outrages of the day. For indie authors, however, I think there are four important lessons to take away from the article and the reaction to it.
Lesson #1: never, never, never, never, never, never talk to journalists, but especially American corporate journalists. Remember the business model of 21st century American corporate journalism is not to inform readers and viewers, serve as the watchdog of democracy, hold the powerful to account, or any of the other mottos journalists post on their Twitter bios. The business model is to stir up controversy to generate clicks on Facebook and YouTube ads. We have all seen many such examples of people getting thrown into the meat grinder to generate ad clicks or sensationalized stories that turned out to be total fabrications. There are of course journalists with integrity, but they’re rather rarer than one might hope. Still, it’s best to avoid talking to a journalist unless you’re very familiar with their work already. And with that in mind, all reporters have a gift for seeming you like your best friend while mentally planning how to make you look like history’s greatest monster in their article or news segment.
If a reporter specifically approaches you to write a story about you or claims to “want to get your side of the story,” the odds that the journalist has integrity are about the same as you finding a magic ring that grants wishes without those wishes going horribly wrong in an ironic like yet darkly amusing manager. Come to think of it, a magic ring that grants wishes that go horribly wrong is a pretty good metaphor for media attention. However, there are always exceptions. The day I published this, Esquire magazine released a profile of Sanderson that was far more even handed and balance than the one that Wired, which was an interesting example of good journalism versus bad. Still, I still recommend you should always remain cautious about speaking with journalists.
Lesson 2: writing clear, unobtrusive prose is unambiguously a good thing. All the big brain experts agree that the US has problems with literacy, with many adults struggling with both reading and writing. Actual teachers I’ve spoken to agree that the COVID reaction made this problem much worse. The kids who spent two years in the various lockdowns with remote learning lost two years of development and are therefore two years behind where they should be, which means at this point it’s going to have a lifelong impact. With all that in mind, how is writing books that are easily accessible possibly a bad thing? I’ve gotten a few emails from readers who said that they used to hate reading but my books drew them in and got them into the habit, which is always nice to hear. If Sanderson is doing that on a larger scale, isn’t that a good thing? All the big brain experts say that literacy is vital for pretty much every aspect of modern civilization, so shouldn’t we encourage anything that gets people reading more? I mean, there are lots of popular books I don’t like, but I don’t bash people for reading them. Heaven knows I have tastes that don’t agree with everyone. I spent a lot of 2022 playing Elder Scrolls Blades, which is not exactly considered a masterpiece, but I still enjoyed the game. There is a time and place for beautiful, complex, evocative prose, but it’s far less often than its advocates think. Clear communication, in my opinion, is often more important than beautiful communication. Writing books that are easily accessible is not a bad thing and is in fact helping to address a serious problem.
The third lesson: Writing clear, unobtrusive prose that doesn’t get in the way of the reader is much harder than you think it is. I think the unspoken assumption when people criticize simple prose is that the writers who use simple prose do so because they can’t write complex prose, but I think the truth is that communicating clearly through the written word is much more difficult than many people believe. Regrettably, there are many people who couldn’t write a coherent sentence with the fate of the world depended upon it, and you’ve met some of them. In fact, you’ve probably met many of them. Think of how many times you’ve gotten an email from your boss or your employer, and you have no idea what they’re trying to say in the email, or how many coworkers you you’ve had who couldn’t write a lucid email, or you’ve gotten a complaint from a customer, only it’s so incoherently written that you can’t figure out what they’re trying to complain about. Or you get a text message from someone and can’t figure out what they meant. Were they being sarcastic? Were they making a joke? Are they really an angry? It’s hard to tell.
I’ve written before about how well the reasons Ulysses S. Grant was an effective commander during the US Civil War was his ability to write clear instructions for his subordinates that left no room for misinterpretation or ambiguity about what Grant wanted done. Given that the Civil War was long before modern telecommunications and Grant’s subordinates couldn’t call them up on their cell phones and ask what he wanted to do, this was obviously a vital skill. Hopefully none of us will have to command one side of a major industrial power’s civil war. But even without such fraught stakes, in the 21st century,clear communication is just as useful of a skill. So people sometimes like to bash on clear, simple prose, but writing clear prose that effectively conveys the writers intended meaning is much more difficult than people think. It’s a highly valuable skill, even if you’re not a fiction writer.
And the 4th lesson is that consistently taking the High Road can really pay off in the long run. Sanderson posted a response to the article on Reddit and it was basically: please be nice to the guy who wrote the article; he tried his best. But the overall response to the article reminding me of one of the most debated parts of the Bible, the parable of the shrewd manager, which goes like this: “Jesus told his disciples there was a rich man whose manager was accused of wasting his possessions, so he called him in and asked him, “What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your management because you cannot be manager any longer.” The manager said to himself, what shall I do now? My master is taking away my job. I’m not strong enough to dig and I’m ashamed to beg. I know what I’ll do so that when I lose my job here, people will welcome me into their houses. So he called in each one of his master’s debtors. He asked the first, “How much do you owe my master?” “900 gallons of olive oil,” he replied. The manager told him, “Take your bill, sit down quickly, and make it 450.” And then he asked the second, “And how much do you owe?” “1000 bushels of wheat,” he replied. He told him, “Take your bill and make it 800.” The master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly, for the people of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own kind than are the people of the light. I tell you use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.” Jesus was clear about a lot of things, but this wasn’t one of them.
What does this parable mean exactly? People have been arguing about the interpretation for 2,000 years. We could be pretty sure Jesus Christ was not endorsing accounting fraud, even though that’s what the shrewd manager is essentially doing. Like does it mean you should dismiss worldly things to focus on the spiritual or that you should store up treasures in heaven? Or you should use worldly wealth to perform good deeds, or that you should do good deeds as zealously as the shrewd manager was dismissing his master’s debtors, or that you should use wealth to make friends for yourself in your hour of need? I even wrote this parable as a joke into one of the Dragonskull books. Gareth notices that the priests of the Church of Andomhaim prefer to avoid preaching on this parable and focus instead on ones with easier applicability to everyday life: the Good Samaritan, Lazarus and the rich man, or the sheep and the goats.
Now back to our original point. Over the course of his career, it seems that Sanderson has tried pretty consistently to take the High Road: making friends with other authors, releasing a lot of a lot of free YouTube podcast content about writing, and bringing out more books and merchandise for his constituency. A well timed hit piece can destroy someone’s reputation, or at least put a serious dent into. It seems the opposite has happened here. Sanderson banked up enough goodwill from his peers and his readership that the Wired article just sort of bounced off.
In fact, the Esquire magazine piece I mentioned above mentioned that neutral observers were put off by how hostile the Wired article was. You all too frequently see authors, tradpub and indie, engaging in bad behavior: rounding up review mobs, abusing trademarks, sabotaging each other, making false reports against each other on the publishing platforms, and so forth. In fact the day I finished writing this, some newish book service got in trouble for fabricating endorsement quotes from high profile indie authors. Now, if Sanderson had spent the last twenty years doing all that kind of stuff, when this, uh, Wired hit piece arrived, it all would have come out. But he didn’t. And so it didn’t, and his reputation will probably survive the Wired hit piece intact. So it seems weighing aside any moral or spiritual views, if you look at it from terms of pure practicality, it seems better to take the High Road over the long term. That way, when a crisis like a media hit piece arrives, it is much less likely to do significant damage. So that is it for this week.
Thank you for listening to the Pulp Writer Show. I hope you find this show useful and interesting. If you enjoyed the podcast, please leave your review on your podcasting platform choice, whether that’s Apple, Google, Spotify, wherever you listen to your podcast through; the good reviews really do help. Stay safe and stay healthy and see you all next week.
