Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Image

Ender in Exile 507

Posted by samzenpus
from the read-all-about-it dept.
stoolpigeon writes "Orson Scott Card's work Ender's Game began as a novelette, which he says he wrote as a means of leading up to the full story he had developed, Speaker for the Dead. Ender's Game was published as a full novel in 1985, and won the Hugo and Nebula awards (as did Speaker for the Dead in '86 and '87). I think it is safe to say that Ender's Game is ensconced in its position as a science fiction classic. Now, 23 years later, Card has finished the first direct sequel to Ender's Game in his new novel Ender in Exile." Keep reading for the rest of JR's review.
Ender in Exile
author Orson Scott Card
pages 377
publisher Tor Books
rating 7
reviewer JR Peck
ISBN 978-0765304964
summary A good midquel in the Ender's series
While Speaker for the Dead was published right after Ender's Game, there is a huge gap in time between the two stories. Due to the effects of traveling at close to light speed, thousands of years pass between the two novels. Chapter fifteen of Ender's Game does give an explanation of the events that fill that time. Card also went on to write other novels set in the Ender universe that do not involve Ender directly but rather other students from the battle school and family. This makes Ender in Exile more of a 'midquel', a term Card uses in the afterword, than a sequel. Because of this, from a high level view of the plot, readers who have stuck with the saga will not find much new here. This is a closer look at events already related in other books for the most part.

Card is an able author and this story is solid. Much of it reminded me of some of my favorite classic science fiction. There is colonization, extended periods of life aboard space ships, discovery of alien civilization and not much in the way of hard science. Card's primary purpose is to analyze and consider the human condition as opposed to exploring technological possibilities or theories. Almost everything that is highly advanced is the result of alien technology and is never explained or understood. Much of it functions on an almost mystical or magical level.

Ender is a young adolescent with an incredibly unique life and mind. In this novel we see him transitioning and growing from a youth into a man. I was often reminded of Herbert's Paul Atreides when he was first on the run in the desert with his mother in the book Dune. Ender is aware that he is different and has amazing capabilities but he is unsure just what the full ramifications of that difference are. He is trying to find his place in humanity and in the universe as a whole.

The story encompasses four basic plot lines that flow one to the next. I never felt any great sense of urgency or climax and resolution in the story. Really what it felt like was a thread weaving together pieces from the earlier stories. While the themes and issues were great, sometimes the characters were remote or the working of the issues very subtle. The most impacting and emotional moments relied upon knowledge of events from the other books in the series to carry their full force. In that light the novel is very effective. I think that fans of the Ender series, already biased towards this work, are going to be very pleased and enjoy Ender in Exile greatly. They are going to get to dig just a bit deeper into this world and it's primary character Andrew Wiggin. They will enjoy moments of discovery and the answer to questions that may have been in the back of their minds, possibly for the last twenty years or so.

On the other hand, someone new to the series may not be as enthralled and may find the story to be a bit flat. If I could I would rate this book in two ways. For those who have not read all the other Ender books, a 6 or 7. This is not bad since the book is designed to sit in the middle of an existing set of tales. It is possible that someone could pick this book up without having read a single Ender story or novel and track with it. I think they would even find it interesting if a little flat. But for a fan of the series with a high degree of familiarity with the characters and events of this world it is probably a solid 8 or 9. At the very least, Card has done nothing to tear down what he has built up but has completed a sturdy addition to the body of work.

In the afterword Card has some interesting comments to make about reader involvement in helping him to write this story. He also explains how he would like to approach some discrepancies between this story and what is related at the conclusion to Ender's Game. I thought it was a sign of the times that an author, facing a large and complex world he had created but could not track on his own, was able to use the internet to call upon readers assistance in achieving as much consistency as possible.

This is a thoughtful, well written book. It may even motivate some to dig up an old copy of Ender's Game so that they can relive the enjoyment of a classic and see what is new to find. I think that most will not be disappointed. Some may not be as thrilled as they would hope, but there is something here for any science fiction fan.

On a side note, in conjunction with the release of this new book, Marvel Comics is doing a limited series comic adaptation of the original Ender's Game novel.

You can purchase Ender in Exile from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

*

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ender in Exile

Comments Filter:
  • by jollyreaper (513215) on Monday November 17, 2008 @02:48PM (#25790449)

    Yeah, kinda peaked at Speaker for the Dead, went downhill since. Cue XKFD comic but I'll let someone else whore for that karma.

    • I disagree. I felt Xenocide was easily the best in the series, and Ender's Game was easily the worst. The Shadow series is also quite good, but I'm not sure if you're counting that as separate or not.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        I thought Xenocide was a good sequel. But it doesn't stand independant of enders game, and although it is good, it is only good because of the great book that the first one was...
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Lord Apathy (584315)

        I'm sorry but you need to put down the crack pipe NOW!. It is common knowledge that Xenocide and children of the mind where the worse. Speaker for the dead was the best of the books after Enders Game and Ender's Game was the best and should have stood alone. There should only one and all that jazz.

        We won't even bother with the shadow books. Books that never should have been written.

        • by sab39 (10510)

          Xenocide was the only one that I actively disliked. I actually liked Children of the Mind and I'd like to see a sequel to that...

          • I really hated Xenocide and Children of the Mind just a little less so. I like Speaker though. As for the shadow books, I sort of like the first one. I just mentally edited out the parts that made bean look like a god and ender like bumbling idiot. I made it halfway through the next shadow book, said "fuck it", and used it to even up the legs on a end table.

            Ender's Game was my favorite book for a long time. The "sequel" have spoiled it to the point that I can no longer even think of reading it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by arth1 (260657)

      The "review" fails to mention whether the book is as full of proselytising and glorifying christian "values" as his other later books.
      Based on the direction his books have twisted in, I would like to know this before I buy (or don't buy).

      • by stoolpigeon (454276) * <bittercode@gmail> on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:01PM (#25790679) Homepage Journal

        I'm not sure - he mentions monogamy as the optimum more than once - but I don't think it would really stand out unless one was already aware of some of the controversy around some of Card's statements on issues.
         
        There is a lot of time contemplating the morality of killing especially in regards to self-defense. I don't know that their is necessarily any position espoused beyond it being better not to kill others if possible. The book raises more questions than it gives answers. It didn't feel overly preachy to me - from any viewpoint - Christian or otherwise. Hopefully that helps to answer your "question".

        • by Rayban (13436) * on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:12PM (#25790881) Homepage

          He managed to keep the preaching out of the homecoming series, which had an openly-gay character. The character (Zdorab) had some bizarre views that were obviously influenced by Card's worldview, but it didn't take away from the book.

          The homecoming series dealt (though not as the primary focus) with some of the morality of "forcing" monogamous relationships on a small tribe of humans disconnected from society.

          I think he's an annoying editorial writer with back-asswards views, but this atheist can still enjoy his works.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by Anonymous Coward

            The Homecoming series is a thinly-veiled rewrite (and interpolation) of the first part of the Book of Mormon (Card is Mormon). I didn't really like them from a literary standpoint.
            On the other hand, they helped me see the works I'd been raised to believe were the word of God in an entirely new light--I'm also atheist now.

          • by Chris Burke (6130) on Monday November 17, 2008 @04:21PM (#25792023) Homepage

            I think he's an annoying editorial writer with back-asswards views, but this atheist can still enjoy his works.

            I find his personal politics abhorrent, but I can't really find any fault with how those views may be expressed in his works. I mean, his personal politics are quite absolutist and shallow, yet in his books we have people of differing opinions trying to make moral and practical choices in extremely difficult situations, and often pay a heavy price for whatever choice they do make. It's the depth of the moral conflicts in the books that interested me.

            That said, I only found out about his personal politics after having already acquired and read as many of his books as I cared to (because it seemed the quality was dropping off). If I was going out to buy Ender's Game for the first time today, knowing what I do about the author, I may reconsider the purchase.

        • by MozeeToby (1163751) on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:36PM (#25791247)

          It isn't so much about 'preachy-ness' as it is about 'propaganda-ness'. In the Shadow series, for instance, we have the homosexual character of Anton. He is not in any way evil, Card doesn't ask us to fear or hate him as you might expect from a right wing writer.

          Instead (and arguably worse), when we are first introduced to Anton we are asked to pity him. He is given a ludicrously strong cognitive dissonance to ham handedly symbolize the dissonance that Card assumes the man must have because of his lifestyle. He is utterly lonely and unhappy, and it is heavily implied that he has considered suicide as the only option to end his suffering.

          Later in the story, Anton has *gasp* married. No, not to a man, but to a woman. In fact he is going to be a father. He is happy, talkative, and engaging. He mentions in passing that his homosexual tendancies have made his marriage harder but that with work they are able to get through it and live a full and happy life.

          In my opinion, this is a more disgusting attack on gay rights than any violent diatrabe could ever be.

          • by bigstrat2003 (1058574) * on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:55PM (#25791519)

            Honestly, I think you're reading things into the books that aren't there. I never got the implication that Anton was suffering for any propagandized reason, or that he was gay for that matter. I certainly didn't think that it was odd that a lonely man would be happy when he had a family to keep him company, that's how anyone who had experienced years of loneliness would react.

            I can't help but feel that this is someone reading into the book what they want to read into it, which is what I find, 9/10 times, is at fault when people talk about the author being preachy about his/her values. I just didn't see any evidence for the claims you make in Card's books.

            • I am 99.9% positive that Card was very clear that Anton was gay. I'd have to go back and look for that extra .1% but I don't really feel like it. Also, when I first read those stories it was before the extent of Card's Homophobic tendencies were know, at least to me. In fact, it was what inspired me to go out and see just what his political views were, which was how I came to find out just how bigoted the man is.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Just read some of it at your local bookstore. Unlike the RIAA and MPAA, it's ok to obtain a free copy and use it a little before deciding if you want to purchase it or not.

        There's also this thing called a "Library" that contains an ancient form of knowledge, conveyed using smudges of pigment on dried plant fiber.

      • Spoiler (Score:5, Funny)

        by 0xABADC0DA (867955) on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:35PM (#25791227)

        Ender proves himself by posthumously baptizing all the souls of his victims, thereby justifying all the killing and giving the story a feel-good Hollywood ending.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by WalksOnDirt (704461)

      For me it peaked at the initial novelette, which I did think was very good. I read a couple of the books but I didn't find them interesting.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Lord Ender (156273)

      Card lost his mind. He's a fanatical religious hate-monger. He proposed violently overthrowing the government if gays are given the right to marry. I'm never buying anything he writes again.

      • by killmenow (184444)
        If only I had mod points.
      • So... I have to ask. Did you come to that conclusion before or after you selected your nick?

        • by Lord Ender (156273) on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:25PM (#25791083) Homepage

          As you can tell from the UID, I've been using that name for a long time. I picked that name when signing up for slashdot in the nineties. I was reading Ender's Game at the time.

          A decade later, I would like to change the name, but I don't want to lose the karma and the low UID :-(

          But as a onetime fan of Card's work, I am saddened to learn that he shares much in common with groups like the Taliban.

          • by dgris (454) <dgris@netgods.net> on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:48PM (#25791405) Homepage

            As you can tell from the UID, I've been using that name for a long time.

            I don't want to lose the karma and the low UID

            Lol. 6-digit "low" uid. Freakin' newbies. ;-)

          • by bhima (46039) *

            I really don't disagree with your assessment of Card, I read Ender's Game some time ago and now I share much the same sentiments.

            I hadn't noticed the UID thing... so they are so high now...interesting. I picked my nick a while ago, so I get where you've coming from.

          • by TrekkieGod (627867) on Monday November 17, 2008 @04:51PM (#25792613) Homepage Journal

            But as a onetime fan of Card's work, I am saddened to learn that he shares much in common with groups like the Taliban.

            When I found out about Card's personal views I was pretty surprised. I agree that they're fairly extremist views, and I pretty much disagree with him in every way.

            However I don't really see the hate toward his books. I see all these posts saying that his books are advertisements for his religion, his anti-gay views, whatever. I don't think he's doing that. In fact, it's pretty hard to reconcile his pro-war views with the pain Ender felt when he discovered his own wargames were part of an actual war.

            I will agree that his books are somewhat colored by his views, but you can't expect an author to do otherwise. The best sci-fi is a comment on society, and it has to end up being the author's comment on society. If you were to sit down and write a book, your hero would form decisions that agreed with your morals. He's the good guy, he has to do what you think the good guy would do. Feel free to disagree with the man on his personal views (I do), but judge his work on its own merits. If you liked Ender's Game once, there's no reason to start disliking it because you found out something about the author that you didn't know before.

            I like Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead (the only two I've read). If I were to criticize them for something, it would be for the somewhat amateurish writing style (in my opinion). I don't see what makes them so cult worthy among so many awesome sci-fi novels, but they're pretty good.

      • by splatter (39844)

        So any bets how long before he starts a religion and what they will call themselves?

    • by Leebert (1694) * on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:39PM (#25791273)

      I kind of liked Ender's Shadow, but a while after I read it, I realized that I now looked on Ender more as middle-management. :)

  • Nope, sorry (Score:2, Interesting)

    by dedazo (737510)

    Much as I enjoyed the Ender series, Scott Card has revealed himself [examiner.com] to be a massive douche. I'm not buying or reading his books anymore.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 17, 2008 @02:59PM (#25790625)

      good call, thats why I don't use ReiserFS, watch any movie with heath ledger and don't use DC power (Edison was a big douche bag).

    • Re:Nope, sorry (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Moridineas (213502) on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:03PM (#25790719) Journal

      I don't really get it... I mean ok, even if you really think he is a mega-douche, why stop reading his books? Does that really do anything positive? Does somebody who has an opinion that you disagree with really offend/startle/upset/whatever you so much that you can't read anything they've written? I personally feel this is a big problem with our society today--somebody's political beliefs are enough to earn them boycotts, scorn, hate, risk their jobs, etc. Of course you as a free individual have every right to do whatever you want to do--including boycotting Orson Scott Card--but I just think our society should take a collective chill pill!

      I can see not BUYING more of his books, though at this point he's got so much money he could never sell another book and be ok, so it's a somewhat futile action, but I guess that matters..

      There are a ton of authors, actors, musicians, etc who I think are moronic halfwits when it comes to politics. I think the same thing about some of my friends and family too! I get past it. Douche though they may be, I couldn't care less what their political opinions are when it comes to listening to their music or reading their books. Why do you have to be in ideological lockstep with an author to enjoy their works?

      Apologies if I'm somehow misinterpreting your post...?

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Chyeld (713439)

        If it were a case of "Red vs. Blue", I'd agree with you. Take the product as a separate item and if it is enjoyable on its own, forget that you may hold a different worldview than the author.

        When it comes down to someone being a step away from Fred Philips land, I draw the line. Supporting radical hate by funding it, regardless of the flavor of hate, is not acceptable. As long as someone holds or espouses an opinion that makes me feel it's likely that money I pay to them for their work might go into the han

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by bigbigbison (104532)
        The number of English language books that have been printed is so large that it is impossible for any one person to read them all. I could read all day every day and not read every book. I probably wouldn't even be able to read every book that people think is good.

        There is a finite amount of time until I die. I'm not going to spend hours of my life reading something written by an outspoken bigot. There is something else out there that is just as good if not better written by someone who doesn't have o
    • What's really ironic about your post is that the author of the linked article specifically says that you should separate the man and his opinions from his work.
      • Re:Nope, sorry (Score:4, Insightful)

        by SydShamino (547793) on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:16PM (#25790949)

        Why? As a single consumer, I have very little power in the economy. But my one ability is to not patronize those I disagree with. It has very little overall effect, but it is my only effect.

        Orson Scott Card is a homophobe and douche? His life's work is meaningless to me.

        Tom Cruise supports an oppressive regime? I don't need his films.

        Owners of local BBQ place talking about how social safety nets are bullshit and a gun and your own wits are all you need (because nothing bad ever happens to you out of your control) and how in an ideal world they could just shoot all the corrupt *local* politicians that make them charge sales tax and pay for library bonds? I won't eat there again. (And they should learn to keep their political views to themselves while patrons are in their restaurant, unless they wish to only cater to their nutball crowd.)

        • by oGMo (379)

          Why? As a single consumer, I have very little power in the economy. But my one ability is to not patronize those I disagree with. It has very little overall effect, but it is my only effect.

          No. That's just the lazy man's rationalization. You can't be bothered to speak out or actually do anything, so you decide not to do something, and convince yourself that, by not doing something, you're doing something. Guess what: you're not.

          This is entirely different from a boycott. You simply disagree with what so

        • by moderatorrater (1095745) on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:57PM (#25791567)

          Why?

          Ask the writer of the article that question, since I was referencing his opinion.

          Orson Scott Card is a homophobe and douche? His life's work is meaningless to me.

          Because he has opinions you don't like, his work's meaningless? That doesn't sound overly harsh/condemning to you? Card has many openly homosexual characters in his books, and I can't think of a single one that's a villain.

          You, on the other hand, can't stand that he thinks homosexuality is wrong and speaks out about it, therefore anything he does is tainted. Congratulations, sir, you've successfully demonized people on the other side of the argument and made intelligent, rational discourse nearly impossible.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Moridineas (213502)

          Owners of local BBQ place talking about how social safety nets are bullshit and a gun and your own wits are all you need (because nothing bad ever happens to you out of your control) and how in an ideal world they could just shoot all the corrupt *local* politicians that make them charge sales tax and pay for library bonds? I won't eat there again. (And they should learn to keep their political views to themselves while patrons are in their restaurant, unless they wish to only cater to their nutball crowd.)

          Your g*ddamned right, how dare they have an opinion? How dare they express themselves? They should learn to be more like you and your enlightened crowd. I can't wait till we are all in ideological lockstep...differing opinions really suck and are offensive. Must have been a tough visit to that restaurant.

          Oh yeah, ban all bumperstickers and yard signs--they show differences in opinion which should not be allowed.

      • by devjj (956776) *

        Except that in a capitalist economy you vote with your dollars. The LDS require tithing, so the purchase of anything from any LDS member contributes directly to the coffers of the LDS. That money then gets funneled into initiatives like Prop 8, et al.

        I'm with SydShamino on this one. I'll never watch another Tom Cruise, Will Smith, or John Travolta flick - at least until they renounce Scientology. I'll freely admit I loved Ender's Game when I read it in high school, but I'm not going to support this jack

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I can't fathom giving money to a man that uses his speaking platform to try to say I'm subhuman or that I'm defying God.

    • Re:Nope, sorry (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:23PM (#25791055)

      Much as I enjoyed the Ender series, Scott Card has revealed himself [examiner.com] to be a massive douche. I'm not buying or reading his books anymore.

      Go to the article you listed and notice that the first highlighted section says "mortal enemy" in it. If you go to the article it links to that was written by Card, this paragraph is not to be found in it. Could it be a case of someone distorting what he said? Hmm...

      Card is not a favorite here because
      1) He's against gay marriage.
      2) He's one of the very few popular writers who admits (gasp!) to being a Christian.
      3) He's not a flaming liberal.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by SydShamino (547793)

        Slashdot is populated by libertarians, not liberals, for the most part. They may, in general, dislike Card for 1) and 2), but they are probably a better target for your 3).

      • Re:Nope, sorry (Score:5, Insightful)

        by meringuoid (568297) on Monday November 17, 2008 @06:52PM (#25794617)
        He's one of the very few popular writers who admits (gasp!) to being a Christian.

        You may not have noticed this but we're awfully keen on J. R. R. Tolkien around here.

    • Re:Nope, sorry (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jmichaelg (148257) on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:27PM (#25791109) Journal
      The article you link to links to Card's essay on homosexual marriage [ornery.org]. Reading the original Card essay, I didn't find the quoted statement. I find that a bit odd since the quote is quite lengthy. So it appears either the quote was never there and the article's author is fabricating a story or the quote was redacted. I'm curious what the truth is.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ChaosDiscord (4913) *

      If I refused to read, watch, or listen to books, movies, or music from people who were massive douches, I'd be left with almost nothing.

      There are almost certainly authors, directors, software companies, and the like that are providing significant financial support to causes you hate. But they're not as outspoken about it. Your little boycott isn't a boycott against being a douche, it's a boycott about being outspoken in your douchiness.

  • I know someone is going to point out "unique" is a boolean state, but I think that's the wrong way of thinking about it... technically, everything is probably unique, since you can just redefine your thinking of "its kind". And then again, nothing is 100% unique, because it falls under the category of "thing". So it makes sense to think about degrees of uniqueness.

    Admittedly "incredibly unique" probably still isn't the deftest choice of words, but I've seen much worse.

    • by Petrushka (815171)

      Admittedly "incredibly unique" probably still isn't the deftest choice of words,

      I like the bit about "transitioning" myself.

      I enjoyment a bit of transitioning myself every now and then. Anyone who doesn't possession the spare time for it doesn't comprehension what they're deprivation of.

  • Card also went on to write other novels set in the Ender universe that do not involve Ender directly but rather other students from the battle school and family.

    This is of course, the Shadow series featuring Bean, Petra, Achilles, etc. I'm pretty sure in Ender in Exile we get to see the results from Achille's children being out in the universe.

  • by DrWho520 (655973) on Monday November 17, 2008 @02:59PM (#25790643) Journal
    Card's primary purpose is to analyze and consider the human condition as opposed to exploring technological possibilities or theories. Almost everything that is highly advanced is the result of alien technology and is never explained or understood. Much of it functions on an almost mystical or magical level.

    I always thought this was the point. In science fiction, the high technology is a plot device and how our interaction with said device describes aspects of human behavior is the story. I do not need to know how a technological fountain of youth works. I just need to know it makes people young again and requires something of a high cost personal cost, say the ability to feel love. How society treats the creator of this device, whether people who refuse to use it are ostracized by society, do people who use the machine experience regret? The dilithium crystal configuration of the device is irrelevant compared to those aspects of the story.

    Just my two cents.
    • by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Monday November 17, 2008 @03:22PM (#25791029)

      The problem is that as you get further and further away from current science you end up more and more in the realm of "magic".

      And if the writer is resorting to that, then the story is probably going to be pretty light and dependent upon plot contrivances to get the writer out of any corner he ends up writing himself into.

      In the fountain of youth example, it could matter. How available is the process? Is it possible to restrict who gets it? What about pricing? Would there be wars over it with eternal youth offered as the plunder? Or is the secret something anyone can cook up in their kitchen using dandelions and shower scum?

      Light stories are good for obvious moral statements (think "Twilight Zone"). But they tend to fall apart on anything longer.

      The more basic the change is (eternal youth) the more ramifications it will have on society. And the less likely the writer will have addressed them. Or even thought of them.

      • by Abcd1234 (188840)

        The problem is that as you get further and further away from current science you end up more and more in the realm of "magic".

        And if the writer is resorting to that, then the story is probably going to be pretty light and dependent upon plot contrivances to get the writer out of any corner he ends up writing himself into.

        Which is why any science fiction or fantasy author must devise a strict set of rules which govern their contrivances. Personally, I don't give a crap *why*, say, a transporter in Star Trek

  • I always thought Ender taking short trips but leaving the universe behind was an interesting idea. Talk about fleeing from your past. A short trip to you and everyone you ever knew is dead. Even being famous, he was able to start fresh.

  • Card is a wonderful SF writer, and I enjoyed the first 3 in the Ender series. However, I later found out that not only is Orson Scott Card is a homophobe, but a rather nasty one, having written things like gays should be moved to Leper Colonies and the like.

    http://urlbit.us/e4v [urlbit.us]

    Card is certainly entitled to his opinions. However, this ex-fan of his will never be able to read another word of his until he has a change of heart.

    Why is it that such great minds like Orson Scott Card, William Shockley, and

  • Ender's game, and many years later, Ender's Shadow, were two good books.
    The other six books, 3 in the original and 3 in the shadow series are written with even less talent that Douglas Adam's later books.
  • On the religious side I pity Card. He feels some bizarre persecution of his religion that I don't think has occurred in our lifetime. If you read Folk of the Fringe Or similar collection of short stories, it comes across in his work. (Obviously it also comes across more aggressively in his political rants.)

    I'll give the book a chance, but I might check it out from a library.

     

  • Card thought to himself "I need an easy project guaranteed to make money from the fanbois, so I'll go back to the goldmine and crank out some backstory."

    I lost a lot of respect for Card when I started reading his sites, especially his "World Watch" columns that are published in the Rhino Times. As a columnist, he's a stupid, irrational thinker, and rationalizing this with books that seem really smart clued me in to the degree to which authors get to dress the stage on which they argue in their novels. Wha

  • by wisebabo (638845) on Monday November 17, 2008 @04:04PM (#25791711) Journal

    no one in Hollywood would risk offending the "gay" mafia nor would they dare go up against the inevitable boycotts and protests.

    And I agree!

    Would you buy a painting, no matter how great, from Hitler? (He was an artist when he was quite young I understand). Knowing his views, I certainly wouldn't and I'm neither gay nor Jewish!

    This isn't a case of being P.C., it is a case of just being C.

: is not an identifier

Working...