Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 121 posts

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#81

Post by Pooter »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #72
burgerbrain wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hateful and discriminatory seems like a decent line to me, but hey, its a judgement call. Decide for yourself.

Hateful and discriminatory seems like a decent line to me To me, you sound like the thought police. In my moral code, we're entitled to think what we want, and nobody has any business condemning us based on our thoughts. The line is our actions: if we do something to someone as a result of our thoughts, that crosses the line. I've said to a few gay friends that I personally think that homosexuality is gross; but I al…

>> Hateful and discriminatory seems like a decent line to me > To me, you sound like the thought police.

You sound like a dishonest jackass, or someone who can't bother reading to the end of the single line post he's responding to, which reads:

>... but hey, its a judgement call. Decide for yourself.

Which is essentially the opposite of being "the thought police."

Also, it's great that gay people are cool with you thinking broccoli and their sexuality are gross. You should tell that story again, bro.

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#82

Post by patrickgzill »

telemachos wrote: post #49
grandalf wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author misunderstands what Card is trying to say in response to her questions. Also, she evidently misunderstood Ender's Game quite a bit as well. Ender was suited to be a brilliant military commander precisely because he hated killing so much. A more bloodthirsty commander would have fallen for certain traps, committed certain errors of judgment that Ender was immune to. The nuance here is that Ender's strategic…

> You say, "He is clearly not homophobic." In the interview, Card says "I find the comparison between civil rights based on race and supposed new rights being granted for what amounts to deviant behavior to be really kind of ridiculous. There is no comparison. A black as a person does not by being black harm anyone. Gay rights is a collective delusion that's being attempted" (emphasis mine). Calling homosexuality "de…

I think that a relatively sane viewpoint would cover the idea that being black is not something the person chooses to become, while engaging in homosexual behavior is very clearly a lifestyle choice; given that there is genetic coding for whether you are black or not, but no coding for homosexuality.

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#83

Post by chc »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #77
sho_hn wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually don't find it offensive (though I obviously disagree with it) as much as I find it oddly recognizable: What he's trying to do throughout the entire linked text is proliferate the notion that homosexuality is in fact a choice, in that homosexuals can supposedly chose to control their sinful desires at no greater personal cost (but possibly even personal gain), whether those desires be genetically predispose…

proliferate the notion that homosexuality is in fact a choice, in that homosexuals can supposedly chose to control their sinful desires There are certainly a lot of behaviors that we're (as a species if not as an individual) predisposed to, that are viewed as socially unacceptable. For example, the benefits in a Darwinian framework of extramarital affairs are quite well established. It's to a males genetic advantage…

Besides the Biblical argument (which is indeed iffy), Card is a Mormon. The Mormon prophets have been very clear in their condemnation of homosexuality.

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#84

Post by alex_c »

nhebb wrote: post #78
CWuestefeld wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd almost agree with you, but as you describe it, the result would just be deus ex machina . It's not fair to just pull a resolution out of your butt, that couldn't possibly have been predicted. Better to have all the facts there, but not in your face. Commonly, a film with focus on a key point, or dwell on an image, to ensure that the viewer gets it, and I think that's a mistake. A good example of a movie that gets…

I didn't mean deux ex machina . You can provide the information and let the audience infer the result, or you can explicitly show the result. As you build the storyline and subplots, judiciously allowing the audience to interpret what happened at intermediate points in the story or at the end can make it more interesting than simply laying it all out.

It's always a balancing act. Chances are any specific level of detail will belabor the point for some readers/watchers, while simultaneously leaving others in the dark.

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#85

Post by Stormbringer »

latch wrote: post #28

I always thought of Ender's Game of something like a child's book. Something like Harry Potter to LoTRs. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, I mean, Harry Potter got a whole bunch of people reading. But seeing this explanation helps me better understand why I feel like that, and what it means. I'd call this an analysis more than a review. Whatever you think it is, I found it a pretty honest and open piece…

The short story was much better.

There is speculation that the full length novel was ghost written. Essentially somebody asked Card a bunch of questions about it, and he didn't know the answers to any of his questions...

see also: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/5/28/22428/7034

NB: I'm not claiming it's true, just pointing out that a claim has been made

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#86

Post by burgerbrain »

michaeldhopkins wrote: post #76
burgerbrain wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what? I think I'm actually alright with someone thinking that I am terrible because I think that outspoken homophobes are terrible. Yeah, I am pretty sure that doesn't concern me in the slightest. Edit: fixed stupid corrective spelling thing...

Okay, then follow the recursion back the other way. You should expect them to care as little about what you think as you care about what I think. It seems either you believe your opposites have a more open mind than you do (so you can convince them despite your unconcern about being perceived as being like them), or you are writing opinions you hope your intended audience will like so they will like you. Perhaps you…

I am not "open minded" towards homophobia, nor do I want to be, or believe anybody should be. I similarly don't think people should be open minded towards racism or genocide.

If this is close mindedness, then your statement "you believe your opposites have a more open mind than you do" does not concern me in the slightest. This is exactly the sentiment I was expressing earlier.

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#87

Post by burgerbrain »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #72
burgerbrain wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hateful and discriminatory seems like a decent line to me, but hey, its a judgement call. Decide for yourself.

Hateful and discriminatory seems like a decent line to me To me, you sound like the thought police. In my moral code, we're entitled to think what we want, and nobody has any business condemning us based on our thoughts. The line is our actions: if we do something to someone as a result of our thoughts, that crosses the line. I've said to a few gay friends that I personally think that homosexuality is gross; but I al…

You and Scott Card are both entitled to your own opinions and moral beliefs. And I am entitled to call people who spout anti-homosexual hate speech homophobes on the internet.

Furthermore: if Scott Card's stated opinions on homosexuality were as.. mellow.. as yours, then you wouldn't see me caring quite so much. I'm not sure why you're defending yourself when I'm talking about Scott Card...

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#88

Post by pseudonym »

saraid216 wrote: post #43
mcritz wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt similarly. “Why not write a blog post?” I thought.

A blog post in 1999 is asking a little much.

I find it hard to resist posting the obvious XKCD reference (http://xkcd.com/635/).

On a more salient point, I always find it interesting to compare the idea of anonymity in the Ender world compared to what we have now. I'd be curious in seeing Card's take on it; despite how prescient the idea of a blog was, I don't think he ever conceived of how massively outweighed the signal could be compared to the amount of noise.

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#89

Post by puredemo »

nl wrote: post #47
ab9 wrote: post #21

"No book, however good, can survive a hostile reading." Is that really true? The first Orwell book I read ( Homage to Catalonia ) was required for a history class -- a class that had previously assigned some truly awful literature. So I was pessimistic and I read it grudgingly at first. But halfway through the book, I realized I loved it.

I had the same experience with Watership Down: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watership_Down I was set to read it when I was 14 or 15 in English. What 14 or 15 yo boy wants to read a book about a rabbit? I was wrong, and loved it, then went and read every other book Richard Adams wrote. So I guess it's not impossible , but at the same time I was probably broad minded enough to change my mind. Many people won't.

How are his other books?

Re: Orson Scott Card's Amazon Review of Ender's Game

#90

Post by pseudonym »

latch wrote: post #28

I always thought of Ender's Game of something like a child's book. Something like Harry Potter to LoTRs. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, I mean, Harry Potter got a whole bunch of people reading. But seeing this explanation helps me better understand why I feel like that, and what it means. I'd call this an analysis more than a review. Whatever you think it is, I found it a pretty honest and open piece…

To be fair, having read all of the books in the...currently 9? 10? Enderverse-related series, Ender's Game does come off as extremely low-level. The later Ender books go oddly metaphysically-shaped towards the end, and not always enjoyably so. The Shadow series, on the other hand, was (to me) rather more interesting.
Post reply on HN