Can you guess who said these things?

[Terxpahseyton]

No I mean the seven Harry Potter books are fantastic books. No separate category needed. Mouthwash is confused why someone would avoid a fantasy series with such a massive impact because of movies and merch. Well, people are random, Mouthwash, and they won't optimize. People make their taste decisions by proxy and some of them then defend those taste positions as part of them. As someone who avoided the movies and merch, it had no bearing on my reading experience. Valka is free to miss out.

I loved the books (well the finale one was disappointing), though it has been a long time since I last read them. Need to change this, some time. Really curious how they hold up to me these days. My taste refined at ton since then. But boy the memories of swallowing that story, getting only 3 hours sleep before school. That is the kind of book experience which destroys most other art forms.
But what I really wanted to say: the movies are mostly kinda crappy (except the third one, that is the exception), IMO, and I totally get if they turned someone off. I actually wish I hadn't seen them, since they have polluted my book memory.
I mean the first two were made by the guy who made home alone. I think that is saying something.

 

[Hygro]

Spoiler :

I'm pretty sure Ender, as a character, is trained to hit fatally hard his entire life while simultaneously having the knowledge of how hard he hit kept from him. He stopped hitting that hard once he wrested control over his life, even when the stakes were probably higher.

Spoiler :

in Ender’s Shadow it’s clear Card is exploring the different ways prodigal minds get manipulated by the overlords. For Ender to perform he has to believe in the direct viability of the practice as performable in reality: they have to tell him about the ansible or he won’t bother. Bean on the other hand can not be told about the ansible. He would immediately know that it wasn’t a training exercise. Bean will do arbitrary work if it advantages him, unlike Ender, but spots crooks and respects that they seek perfect play according to their position. Ender perhaps assumes people are following convention rather than seeking victory, as validated by his overturning the formation metagame by introducing the legshield snipe game.

 

[Ajidica]

How is that an abhorrent concept? That's the justification for any war of self-defense. And considering what the final consequences are (Ender destroys an alien race, spends his life trying to undo his actions), I certainly don't think Card thinks that "any enemy must be killed."

Then why include two events where Ender uses violence far in excess of what the situation would call for - including an episode where Ender literally kills a boy- and then frame it as Ender choosing to act that way to defend himself? There are no consequences for Ender straight up murdering someone and the authority characters react to it like it is acceptable and fine. I'm not sure how much clearer I can spell out the Unfortunate Implications of a major theme in the book, that if you do a terrible thing for the "right" motives you aren't held responsible.

Here are more events in the Ender universe that show how nonsensical your claim is:

Not slogging through some long sections devoid of context, spell it out for me.

Card has explicitly rejected the idea of eugenics (saying that it was a completely unrealistic aspect of the book), so I don't see any reason to read into this.

Good, at least he was able to recognize one of the many Unfortunate Implications in his book.

What, you read it and then punched a kid in school so you could be like Ender? No wonder you seem so butt-hurt.

No, but from a 12 year olds perspective, look at how it is presented. Ender is hated and mistreated because, as presented by the book, he is so much smarter and better than them and they are envious. Ender lashes out, violently attacking one boy and murdering another, and there are no consequences and tacit approval. That he killed someone isn't dwelled on, but a fair bit of time is spent rationalizing Ender's action as the "appropriate" response and that he struck with enough force to ensure he "wouldn't be threatened again". Not exactly the healthiest concept to be exposing to loner 12 year olds who are bullied to some extent.

 

[Hygro]

Then why include two events where Ender uses violence far in excess of what the situation would call for - including an episode where Ender literally kills a boy- and then frame it as Ender choosing to act that way to defend himself? There are no consequences for Ender straight up murdering someone and the authority characters react to it like it is acceptable and fine. I'm not sure how much clearer I can spell out the Unfortunate Implications of a major theme in the book, that if you do a terrible thing for the "right" motives you aren't held responsible.

Yeah, he kills a boy and gets away with it. That the author doesn't have him punished in-universe by the "authorities" within the story is not evidence of Card's endorsement of that system as a guide to our own. If you want in-story God to strike down the evil doers as part of a desire that writers project your morality into fables through their books, that's your personal preference.

The Major Implication is that given an existential threat, humanity might overreact, build a society to kill another species, and achieve that goal. Because that's the story.

 

[CurtSibling]

The Major Implication is that given an existential threat, humanity might overreact, build a society to kill another species, and achieve that goal. Because that's the story.

Once humanity has wiped out the "Buggers" (good heavens), at least they will be ready when the Daleks arrive.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

No, but from a 12 year olds perspective, look at how it is presented. Ender is hated and mistreated because, as presented by the book, he is so much smarter and better than them and they are envious. Ender lashes out, violently attacking one boy and murdering another, and there are no consequences and tacit approval. That he killed someone isn't dwelled on, but a fair bit of time is spent rationalizing Ender's action as the "appropriate" response and that he struck with enough force to ensure he "wouldn't be threatened again". Not exactly the healthiest concept to be exposing to loner 12 year olds who are bullied to some extent.

Unless my memory is failing, he actually killed them both, and his "lashing out" came only when they physically attacked him.

As to the "inappropriateness" of striking with enough force to not be threatened again, I taught my boys to never start fights, but if someone absolutely insists on it then the consequences are all on them and to finish them as quickly, safely, and permanently as possible. Leaving someone who already demonstrated their willingness to fight the opportunity to come back after a loss with a gang or a gun is just foolish.

 

[Traitorfish]

Card is a garbage-person, but the gargoyle-caricature the internet has made of him is unjust.

I think most people have realised that; the backlash was mostly in the mid-to-late 2000s, among former fans who felt betrayed by the revelation that the author who had appeared so sympathetic to isolated weirdos was actually a champion of the small-minded provincial attitudes they detested. Most of those people have grown past the point of carrying grudges like that, at least as more than a vague negative disposition, and hardly anyone under twenty-five has even read Ender's Game.

I think most of the commercialization came after the Deathly Hallows. Besides, why should that affect your opinion of the books? if you want to be impressed by writing, how about you just read what's written?

If you'd been around for the first couple of films, you'd appreciate where Valka was coming from. The advertising was incessant, and largely obnoxious. I liked Harry Potter, before that, had gobbled up the first four books, but the way the first film was pitched turned me right off the whole series. I can easily understand how somebody who'd never got that far would find the curiosity knocked right out of them.

Even a good book can be ruined by context. I mean, look at the Bible.

 

[Lexicus]

My intense antipathy toward the movies never prevented me from enjoying the books. It also hasn't prevented me from repeatedly watching (some of) the movies.

 

[Traitorfish]

I still think the series went irreparably downhill with Harry Potter and the Tree of Nothing.

( NSFW language.)

 

[cardgame]

With regard to the authorities intervention, wasn't there a critical conversation about Ender's actions, the morality thereof and what if anything to do about it, between the two adult commanders onboard the Battle School, if not in Ender's Game then in Ender's Shadow?.


Plus, ends/means, if your goal is to create the ultimate commander on a limited time window you can't let one or two murders he didn't actually provoke stop you from giving him command. The stakes are just too high. It's simply unfeasible to punish him unless his behavior was that of Achilles, and even Achilles wouldn't be punished until after the Bug War if he was their best tactical mind.

 

[Ajidica]

Plus, ends/means, if your goal is to create the ultimate commander on a limited time window you can't let one or two murders he didn't actually provoke stop you from giving him command. The stakes are just too high. It's simply unfeasible to punish him unless his behavior was that of Achilles, and even Achilles wouldn't be punished until after the Bug War if he was their best tactical mind.

Sure, if Ender's Game was real life; but it isn't. It is a book geared at children/young teens. I would say that puts a bit of a responsibility on Card

Unless my memory is failing, he actually killed them both, and his "lashing out" came only when they physically attacked him.

As to the "inappropriateness" of striking with enough force to not be threatened again, I taught my boys to never start fights, but if someone absolutely insists on it then the consequences are all on them and to finish them as quickly, safely, and permanently as possible. Leaving someone who already demonstrated their willingness to fight the opportunity to come back after a loss with a gang or a gun is just foolish.

But kill them though?

I get that we have a significant philosophical difference over the use of violence, but if one of your kids came home and said "Daddy, I murdered a naked boy in the shower because he was a bully" your reaction wouldn't be "Well, at least he isn't coming back".

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I get that we have a significant philosophical difference over the use of violence, but if one of your kids came home and said "Daddy, I murdered a naked boy in the shower because he was a bully" your reaction wouldn't be "Well, at least he isn't coming back".

Let's say the "naked boy in the shower" was hollering about how he was "gonna get you later." Let's say that he was also proudly boasting about 'having priors' and didn't care about any consequences. And let's say that the circumstances were such that just getting in a fight and being identified would get you, and him, five years in prison.

Now, if you take him at his word that later on the two of you are gonna have to fight, and recognize that your superninja skills aren't up to snuff so that in a "fair" fight you are almost certain to wind up with at least some skinned knuckles, and there will be no way to hide those skinned knuckles from authorities, what is your solution?

For the record, this did not happen with any of my kids, but there is absolutely nothing hypothetical about the situation. So, if you want to let this idiot cost you five years of your life, raise your hand. Okay, good. Now, if you want to eliminate the threat using absolutely no reference to the Marquis of Queensbury by just dusting him while he's naked in the shower to give you the best chance of not getting caught, raise your hand.

The key difference, which you are disregarding in Ender's case and your hypothetical, is that NOTHING happened "because there was a bully." There was an attacker not a bully. Attackers don't leave any choice about being dealt with. Bullies are just bullies. Ender put up with all kinds of bullying. He only eliminated demonstrable threats.

 

[Hygro]

Sure, if Ender's Game was real life; but it isn't. It is a book geared at children/young teens. I would say that puts a bit of a responsibility on Card

What should have happened instead?