![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Ender's Game, and other items
First, a moment to note the passing of two of the "leading lights" of the segregationists, Strom Thurmond and Lester Maddox. I would be hard-pressed to think of something that either man contributed to this nation, and Thurmond, through the luck of living to be 100, certainly did not deserve the label of "elder statesman" he got in his final years in the Senate. Nonetheless, the passing even of such venal men requires a moment to ponder their roles in history. There is something strange about the notion that a man who ran against Truman for thw White House was still in the Senate on New Year's Day of 2003. A lot of history was in that man, and even if the lessons we learn are all negative, they tell us much about this nation as it was before civil rights, and after.
Now on to the book of the day, "Ender's Game." I've tried to leave any spoilers or details out, but just in case...This is the prize-winning 1980s novel by Orson Scott Card about a remarkable child who is forged into what might (or might not) be mankind's only hope to stop a forthcoming alien invasion. It's a very good book, one of the best SF novels I've read in ages. In terms of style, it reads like a Heinlein juvenille at first, but as the complexity of the plot emerges, the style changes. Card is not a wordsmith along the lines of an Alfred Bester, but he makes the plot and the character play work together, unlike many good SF idea writers.
A lot of ideas are bandied about here, dealing with the military, with atittudes of the right to defend a planet (or a mere nation) from an attack, with how childhood works and what might happen if you made children play under different rules. Most of the characters are children, but this is not a children's book, or even a young adult book. It's very serious and complex, and while many teens can read such things, this book strikes me as something that requires perhaps some understanding of life that you get from being forced into adulthood. It would be interesting to find someone who read this as a teen and then again as an adult.
These kids, as un-child-like as they are, still seem like real children in many ways. Card perhpas observed how different the gifted can act and feel sometimes, and wondered what might happen if you put them in an environment where being gifted was rewarded, after a fashion. Or maybe he pondered the notion of "sending children to war" and took it to a literal conclusion. Either way, he builds most of thenovel around an idea that is so "outlandish" that you need to play it in an SF book but that also is not that unusual after all.
Many of the ideas beyond the main one seem familiar at first, but Card is not afraid to twist some, alter others, and let some go beyond what you might expect. There is a minor but important character who in most books would not succeed at his grandiose plans for the world. Card goes the other way with him.
How good is this book? While part of me scoffs at the notion of there being sequels - the ending is heartbreaking and bittersweet and perfect and yet oddly optimistic - when I saw the recent "Ender's Shadow" in the library yesterday, I took it home. Could be that this semi-sequel - it rehashes the events of "ender's Game" from the POV of another character - is a dud, but Card has earned the chance to impress me over.
It's been a while since I found an SF wrtier worth tracking down. I hope that "Ender's Game" is reason to think Card is the real thing.
Now on to the book of the day, "Ender's Game." I've tried to leave any spoilers or details out, but just in case...This is the prize-winning 1980s novel by Orson Scott Card about a remarkable child who is forged into what might (or might not) be mankind's only hope to stop a forthcoming alien invasion. It's a very good book, one of the best SF novels I've read in ages. In terms of style, it reads like a Heinlein juvenille at first, but as the complexity of the plot emerges, the style changes. Card is not a wordsmith along the lines of an Alfred Bester, but he makes the plot and the character play work together, unlike many good SF idea writers.
A lot of ideas are bandied about here, dealing with the military, with atittudes of the right to defend a planet (or a mere nation) from an attack, with how childhood works and what might happen if you made children play under different rules. Most of the characters are children, but this is not a children's book, or even a young adult book. It's very serious and complex, and while many teens can read such things, this book strikes me as something that requires perhaps some understanding of life that you get from being forced into adulthood. It would be interesting to find someone who read this as a teen and then again as an adult.
These kids, as un-child-like as they are, still seem like real children in many ways. Card perhpas observed how different the gifted can act and feel sometimes, and wondered what might happen if you put them in an environment where being gifted was rewarded, after a fashion. Or maybe he pondered the notion of "sending children to war" and took it to a literal conclusion. Either way, he builds most of thenovel around an idea that is so "outlandish" that you need to play it in an SF book but that also is not that unusual after all.
Many of the ideas beyond the main one seem familiar at first, but Card is not afraid to twist some, alter others, and let some go beyond what you might expect. There is a minor but important character who in most books would not succeed at his grandiose plans for the world. Card goes the other way with him.
How good is this book? While part of me scoffs at the notion of there being sequels - the ending is heartbreaking and bittersweet and perfect and yet oddly optimistic - when I saw the recent "Ender's Shadow" in the library yesterday, I took it home. Could be that this semi-sequel - it rehashes the events of "ender's Game" from the POV of another character - is a dud, but Card has earned the chance to impress me over.
It's been a while since I found an SF wrtier worth tracking down. I hope that "Ender's Game" is reason to think Card is the real thing.
no subject
History
A lot of Senate titles aren't too deserved, like Robert Byrd being the Conscience of the Senate. He's another relic like Thurmond and both have almost every building in their home state named after them. The last statesman to pass away would have been Moynihan. His death was a much greater loss and regardless of ideology, Moynihan commanded respect. Nowadays there are very folks like that, though I guess the age of statesmen has ended. Hopefully there are a few decent souls left. I used to have some respect for Hatch, but he's recently turned into an idiot. Well, McCain and Feingold are pretty good, and I like Zell Miller.
I wonder about the next era of Southern politics. You had the crooked robin hood types like Huey Long and the segregationists. I'd have to say looking at the past shows improvement. My grandfather was born in 1908 and he was raised with the mentality of segregation. He was not in any hate group, but he held onto a set of antiquated beliefs and he died in 1972, so he neevr had a chance to really evolve. His grandfather was born in 1840 to a family that owned slaves, and I don't know if he saw the evil of slavery,e xcept in hindsight after the Civil War. To me, the legacy of Maddox and Thurmond is one of hope, because it shows where we were and how far we've progressed, so it makes me hopeful about the future.
no subject
Xenocide was a goodish book but not up to the weight class of Ender's Game by any means. Children of the Mind... not so much even goodish, IMHO. Kinda lame, actually, I thought.
Ender's Shadow and Shadow of the Hegemon revisit the childhood timeline from other POVs. They are better than CotM, good books and well constructed, but not up there with the first two, which had some archetypal resonance and grandeur of scale that telling the stories around them doesn't approach. But then he's not really trying to do that again, he's done it already. It's not unlike if Shakespeare had writen first Hamlet and then, a few years later, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.
Mer