The Real Meaning of Ender according to Salon.

[Addym Kehris]

Thank you Cole and Freethinker. I am wiser now. And isn't that the point of growing older?

So, let's try a different approach here. What is the real meaning of Ender according to Solon? That is how this began and what caught my attention. Frankly I didn't care for the conclusions (conjectures) of Solon. I believe they assume that Card gave a message any real thought. Based on his world views, that we've all become aware of, I find it impossible to believe that the man considered a message. For a person who professes to be such a staunch Christian, I can not reconcile the violant story he's produced with that professed theology.

Unless, that is, you want to compare the adult control over the children through misdirection, with how the hard line christian organizations control their own children through similar tactics. Hmmm.

[EleCivil]

Thank you Cole and Freethinker. I am wiser now. And isn't that the point of growing older?

So, let's try a different approach here. What is the real meaning of Ender according to Solon? That is how this began and what caught my attention. Frankly I didn't care for the conclusions (conjectures) of Solon. I believe they assume that Card gave a message any real thought. Based on his world views, that we've all become aware of, I find it impossible to believe that the man considered a message. For a person who professes to be such a staunch Christian, I can not reconcile the violant story he's produced with that professed theology.

I remember reading an interview with Card where he said that the message was that pre-emptive total war can be justified - that fear of an attack can justify the destruction of another. I wish I could find that article again - I remember that the interviewer kept talking about how she read it as an indictment of war and violence and that it focused on the psychology of an abuse survivor, and Card just kind of brushed all of that off and said "Nope, pro-war. The Bush Doctrine is right." The author closed by saying something about how even though the author was attempting to deliver the exact opposite message than the one she got from reading it, she re-read the book and found that it was still beautiful.

Unless, that is, you want to compare the adult control over the children through misdirection, with how the hard line christian organizations control their own children through similar tactics. Hmmm.

Ahaha. I like the way you think.

[Anthony]

I think a lot of the discussion here was because many of us liked the book, found it really terrific, and then were trying to make sense of the man who wrote it and the book itself.

Yes, Cole, I think you are right and I'm another who was really taken with the book (I read it in a single sitting in an aeroplane between London and HongKong on Christmas eve 1989). Then I enjoyed 'Speaker for the Dead'. But when I tried 'The Worthing Saga' I was repelled by the man's monstrous imagination; how, I thought, could a nice person dream up such horrible situations? I was unable to finish it. I've been unwilling to read anything of his since. And at the time I had no knowledge of his unacceptable opinions about homosexuality. (Aubrey said that my opinion I go about to persuade others to think as I do; but as for my taste I look only to pleasing myself. I think Aubrey was right.)

Love,

Anthony

[The Pecman]

I remember reading an interview with Card where he said that the message was that pre-emptive total war can be justified - that fear of an attack can justify the destruction of another. I wish I could find that article again - I remember that the interviewer kept talking about how she read it as an indictment of war and violence and that it focused on the psychology of an abuse survivor, and Card just kind of brushed all of that off and said "Nope, pro-war. The Bush Doctrine is right."

That's weird, because it's clear by the end of the first book (and movie) that Ender himself is overcome with terrible guilt and remorse at the realization of what he's done. Several subsequent novels make it clear that he was keenly aware of the genocide he had instigated, and he spent the rest of his life trying to make up for it.

But when I tried 'The Worthing Saga' I was repelled by the man's monstrous imagination; how, I thought, could a nice person dream up such horrible situations? I was unable to finish it. I've been unwilling to read anything of his since. And at the time I had no knowledge of his unacceptable opinions about homosexuality.

Not only has Orson Scott Card written some brilliant, award-winning science fiction, he also wrote some great books on writing in general. One of his early-1990s texts on How to Write Science Fiction and also Characters and Viewpoint helped me a great detail in figuring out the basics of how to write.

But he's a terrible, horribly-flawed human being. I hope the failure of the movie did little to promote sales of his books.

[EleCivil]

That's weird, because it's clear by the end of the first book (and movie) that Ender himself is overcome with terrible guilt and remorse at the realization of what he's done. Several subsequent novels make it clear that he was keenly aware of the genocide he had instigated, and he spent the rest of his life trying to make up for it.

I know, right? Seeing the movie made me want to go through the series again - I've finished Game and Shadow and am currently re-reading Speaker for the Dead. I'd forgotten how much of an old-school sci-fi feel this book has. The Demosthenian Hierarchy of Exclusion feels like something straight out of the golden age. And I believe it's what Card used to explain the pro-war theme in the first book.

The Demosthenian Hierarchy of Exclusion is a means of classifying foreignness in a universe in which both human colonized planets and alien life exist. There are four levels:

Utlanning - a human of the same species and same world, but from a different city or country.

Framling - a human from another planet.

Ramen - a creature of a different species that we still recognize as a "person" or even "human". Capable of communication and understanding.

Varelse - a living creature that is incapable of communicating its purposes, desires, or needs. Unintelligent animals fall into this category, as well as species that may be intelligent and self-aware, but we cannot know it.

The idea is that as of the first book, the human race knew of the formics/buggers as varelse - they had come to Earth, responded to no communication attempts, and slaughtered countless humans. Wiping out a population of varelse is considered morally neutral, like a farmer shooting the wolves threatening his livestock. Humans had no way of knowing that the buggers/formics were anything but mindless predators who would continually make attempts to exterminate the humans, and we had no way of asking their intentions or negotiating peace, so humanity was justified in destroying them.

It's once we've determined that certain alien species are ramen - self-aware, intelligent, and capable of communication - that the thought of humans wiping out that species becomes morally questionable. Though the later books put them in several situations where that choice needs to be evaluated. Again, golden age sci-fi style - set up a clear system of rules, and then show the implications of humanity trying to justify breaking them.

Ender's guilt comes from the fact that for hundreds (if not thousands) of years, he is the only person alive who knows that the formics were ramen rather than varelse, and he knows that the only way he can make a universe safe for non-humans is to turn himself into a monster.

Not only has Orson Scott Card written some brilliant, award-winning science fiction, he also wrote some great books on writing in general. One of his early-1990s texts on How to Write Science Fiction and also Characters and Viewpoint helped me a great detail in figuring out the basics of how to write.

Agreed. I think I picked up those two books after you recommended them to me, actually, back when I had only a few chapters to my name. Characters and Viewpoint especially helped me become a better writer.

[The Pecman]

Varelse - a living creature that is incapable of communicating its purposes, desires, or needs. Unintelligent animals fall into this category, as well as species that may be intelligent and self-aware, but we cannot know it.

Lotsa those on the net... (thee and me excepted)...