52 responses

  1. Scott B
    August 1, 2008

    I am into Sci-Fi, and i have a lot of books that i got over the years. his to.

    I did not knew that he did not like Gays, well i’m droping him from my libary.

    Off to the used book store for him. never will i be buying one of his books from now on.

  2. Kith
    August 1, 2008

    So he wants the government overthrown if Prop 8 fails, not if prop 8 passes. Title and article don’t match.

  3. Jason D
    August 1, 2008

    now will someone take hate speech seriously? Or homophobia?

    What else can you call it when someone is willing to incite anarchy in order to avoid letting gays continue to get married.

    I mean nothing we do harms anyone! This doesn’t even fit the supposed offense!

  4. Michelle
    August 1, 2008

    I loved reading Ender’s Game – it was a great exploration of how the military could exploit high tech as part of the recruiting process.

    That said anything he’s written since has been pretty awful reading – hardly worth the time to bother.

    His recent writings on politics and social issues are, to me, a disappointing reflection of a man who seems to have lost his perspective somewhere along the way.

  5. Shannon
    August 1, 2008

    *sigh* I really liked him as an author. I can’t see myself being able to read his books now though, when I know what a hateful person he is.

  6. AJ
    August 1, 2008

    Orson Scott Card is a True Believer who has a long record of homophobic rhetoric. He is the Charlton Heston of science fiction. His portrayal of the future is not quite as inclusive as the one envisioned by Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry. Not quite.

    I am always amazed at the extent to which otherwise reasonable people are willing to immolate their reputations on the altar of religious absolutism. The more they are provided with rational arguments against their beliefs the more intransigent they become. Not even science fiction writers are immune from the virulent meme of fundamentalist dogma.

  7. AJD
    August 1, 2008

    Screw this bozo. Read William Gibson.

  8. Jim Burroway
    August 1, 2008

    Kith,

    Yes, sorry. It was really late when I posted this last night.

  9. Samantha Davis
    August 1, 2008

    Helllooooo Secret Service file!

  10. cooner
    August 1, 2008

    Bummer. I enjoyed “Ender’s Game” but hadn’t kept up on Card’s philosophies.

    I think my favorite part is where he defends himself saying he is NOT a homophobe, when the whole point of his screed here is his irrational fear that gays are going to destroy society and western Democracy. Nice.

  11. Sportin’ Life
    August 1, 2008

    Whatever happened to “Let the people vote?”

    I guess now it’s “Let the people vote. If they don’t vote the way we want, we reserve the right to kill those who disagree with us and impose a military theocracy.”

    Orson Scott Card = anti-American.

  12. Ben in Oakland
    August 1, 2008

    It’s not my fault i’m destroying wesdtern civilization. I just can’t help it. Maybe if I became straight like alan chambers I would stop it, turn my life around, and reproduce.

    As always, the problem is not gay people, but how much gay people bother some straight people, and the bad things those people will do to express it.

    Don’t like gay marriage–overthrow the government, and blame the collapse of america on gays. THEY made me do it!!!!

    Don’t like gay people in the military– damage unit cohesion by not being able to get over it, and blame the fags.

    Don’t like gay people adopting? Those kids are better off in an institution,

    Inger and Sven, good norwegians that they are, are so put off by Ben marrying Paul (August 18, thanks for asking!) that they are not oging to get married and have kids themsevles. there goes norway!!!

  13. johnson
    August 1, 2008

    OSC is a very active Mormon, who writes endlessly for LDS publications on the evils and detriments of gay marriage. He is positively consumed by it. He also claims to “have many gay friends” and also claims to be a “liberal Democrat” who just happens to have supported Bush and is now supporting McCain. He is, in short, a nut.

  14. Bruce Garrett
    August 1, 2008

    There’s a good essay on Card and Ender’s game out there by John Kessel titled, Creating The Innocent Killer. Here: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~tenshi/Killer_000.htm

    I can see where people can approach that novel one way…as a warning against brutality, and the militarization of children. But in my opinion that’s not what Card was doing. In Ender’s Game Card has created scenario of guiltless genocide. The kid wipes out an entire species of intelligent beings thinking he was just playing a game. He is the innocent mass murderer. In my opinion, Card isn’t warning against brutalizing and manipulating children…he’s saying genocide can, under some circumstances, like…you were forced or tricked into it…is not really a moral crime.

    The book contains this absolutely horrifying dialogue by the kid on the relationship of love to war:

    In the moment when I truly understand my enemy, understand him well enough to defeat him, then in that very moment I also love him. I think it’s impossible to really understand somebody, what they want, what they believe, and not love them the way they love themselves. And then, in that very moment when I love them…. I destroy them. I make it impossible for them to ever hurt me again. I grind them and grind them until they don’t exist.

    Mind you, this is the hero of the story speaking. This is the character Card wants you to have sympathy for. And…I believe…it’s Card speaking for himself too. Keep it in mind whenever you read him expressing sympathy for all those genetically deformed homosexuals.

    And the aliens the boy wiped out of existence? In the story, they’re called “the Buggers”.

  15. Emowabi
    August 1, 2008

    I read his work in high school and right after. The sci-fi ender’s series and the fantasy alvin maker series. They were pretty well written when the series’ started, but as time went on they became incoherent and contrived (well, more obviously contrived since they’re fiction). I stopped reading his books. I’ve known about his stance against the gehs for a few years now, but I didn’t realize he was a militant anarchist. How sad.

  16. Timothy Kincaid
    August 1, 2008

    I too found Ender’s Game to be interesting. But as I read beyond that book, I found Card’s writing to be self-important and moralizing.

  17. cd
    August 1, 2008

    Well, you can take this Card fellow’s three screeds and lay them together. Then you’ve got for practical purposes the whole of the anti-SSM “argument” on the reactionary side of the past 20 years and its maudlin emotional and narcissistic basis outlined almost perfect.

    I like the 1990 piece of writing best- it’s the most honest, even though it’s smug. It’s basically an admission that what will erode in an environment of gay equal rights is the LDS orthodox cultural mythology and the one distinctive LDS theological axiom of birth gender being a social and spiritual absolute. (It’s a Creationist dogma of sexuality.) In short, it’s all about the LDS ability to retain mainstream American plausibility and status.

    (Btw, this piece comes around the time that Christian Science, which is/was something of an Eastern US parallel to Mormonism, holed its bottom on the rocks of modern scientific medicine. CS has since declined to perhaps half the US membership it had then and has become a religious group with no public profile. And pretty much forgotten.)

    The 2004 piece is just your average middle of Culture War social reactionary screed, mostly affirming The One True Divinely Revealed Order of the Universe. Of course, the alternative is the end in nihilism. SSM legalization evidently means the end of: Western Civilization, Christianity, American Democracy, American civil peace, American civil freedom, and heterosexual gender roles. It also means the end of the institution of marriage, the institution of the family, and children. (He omits the ‘patriarchal’ qualifier.) Poof. Of course, what he really means is that the social reactionary’s comfort and sense of place and control of American society is declining fast. I’m tearing up, let me go get a Kleenex….

    The most recent piece is almost funny in its rambling effort at fending off despair. Having shown the country in his 2004 piece that all of Western Civilization is at stake and the Divine Order of the Universe is being violated, he is Upset. The country is unrepentant and looked at his awesome 2004 exposé among a thousand others like it and…just shrugged and tuned him and the thousands of likeminded oh-so-brilliant and persuasive polemics out! So off comes the mask every social reactionary wears and the Ancient World pagan priest hiding underneath it emerges with his dire threats of impending destruction. Now the deity/deities of Nature will emerge and smite the fools that violate their Laws of Nature! Shazzam!

    Once Nature comes up, of course they’ll also throw in how Darwinism supposedly works for them, the nihilism that supposedly comes with Darwinism, and of course their obsession with power and fear of it in their enemies’ hands. Their real God and faith doesn’t ultimately seem all that Christian, as has been famously noted.

  18. Patrick ONeill
    August 1, 2008

    ENder’s Game orginated as a short story Card wrote when he was young, and it actually is good SF and deserved the awards – he wrote some good short stories too.

    But he went off the deep end a long time , with follow ups starting to contain weird mormon theology and his signiture issue has become opposition to anything gay.

    He also has become a huge embarressment to the SF community in general – I don’t think anyone listens to him any more except for mormons

  19. Terry T
    August 1, 2008

    Ok….
    While I thought Ender’s Game was a bit on the BORING side, I never really imagined the author would have such a screw loose.
    The simple fact of the matter is Marriage has had many forms which changed from society to society to suit the beliefs of that society. In many, women were property, simply a means to seal a political alliance and ensure the line continues through offspring.
    Our society itself has changed it’s attitude, recognizing the rights of people to marry regardless of race, no offspring is required, ever.
    No matter how hard he tries to turn it around, no amount of denial will change the fact that his beliefs on the matter amount to nothing BUT bigotry in the purest sense of the word.
    I will never read another of his books and will actively inform others not to do so as well.
    Any person who believes that the main purpose for marriage In America this day and age isn’t love and furthermore believes that I should not be able to marry the person I love simply because of our gender, is completely messed up in the head. May he fade to the same obscurity as Fred Phelps.

  20. Velodog2
    August 1, 2008

    I’ve read and enjoyed much of Card’s writing. However careful readers will always notice an undertone of reliogisity in all of his books. In some it is strong enough to rise to the level of allegory ala CS Lewis. Those books I never finished. I more or less guessed as a result that his views on homosexuality would be thus, especially as he did not include (to the best of my recollection) any references to homosexual behavior in any of his novels, despite exploring virtually every other aspect of society and anthropology.

    His books will be going in the trash, not to the used book store for someone else to profit from.

  21. Jarred
    August 1, 2008

    I have to admit that I’m a bit surprised by the number of people who are suddenly announcing their intent to never read Card’s books (again) and even divest themselves of any books written by him that they currently possess. I certainly acknowledge everyone’s right to do so if that’s their choice. But at the same time, I have to wonder if it’s an entirely wise choice.

    It seems to me that if one found value in the books to begin with, the discovery of the author’s homophobia shouldn’t necessarily invalidate that value. It might invalidate the books’ value, but I personally think a careful consideration of the question would be in order.

    Also, based on some comments on this very site, I find myself wondering if there isn’t at least some value in reading Card’s work just to understand how he (and presumably many of his loyal readers) thinks. Such an understanding certainly offers the opportunity for further dialog and discussion, possibly dialog that would be informative and beneficial. I’m reminded of people who avoid other books with controversial subject matter (like the Harry Potter series an “The Shack”) and how they effectively hinder their ability to find a common point of reference to discuss some of that subject matter by that choice.

    Having said that, I’ve never read any of Card’s books. For all I know, there is no value in them. Or perhaps the value I might see in them isn’t of interest to others. And that’s certainly fine. But I just wanted to comment on what seemed to me to be an almost knee-jerk reaction.

  22. Mike
    August 1, 2008

    Does he realize that a great portion of SciFi fans are, in fact, gay? No doubt, he will find out and soon.

  23. Jason D
    August 1, 2008

    “I have to admit that I’m a bit surprised by the number of people who are suddenly announcing their intent to never read Card’s books (again) and even divest themselves of any books written by him that they currently possess. I certainly acknowledge everyone’s right to do so if that’s their choice. But at the same time, I have to wonder if it’s an entirely wise choice.”

    well let’s see, what is essentially a b-level writer who won a few awards has made it clear that he so fully detests some of his readers that he proposes a coup detat if their rights aren’t taken away from them this November. He doesn’t understand how our government works, nor does he care to see past his own prejudice.

    I fail to see what would be the wise decision in this situation? Clearly he is not interested in dialogue, so using the books to understand a completely b@tsh!t position for that purpose is a pointless.

    I’ll give you his viewpoint, I think I understand it. He’s an extremist. He’s a fundamentalist, and like the fundamentalists who have attacked this country for it’s freedoms, he proposed overthrowing it altogether unless it bends to his particular religious dogma. I don’t see what else there is. People don’t propose overthrowing their government on a whim, they do so as a last resort. For him, we are past the point of dialogue. Considering his rhetoric, I doubt we could reach a compromise anyway.

  24. Todd
    August 1, 2008

    I have read many of his books, I enjoyed Ender’s Game when I was younger, but when I read his Return to Earth series, it was a pretty blatant ripoff of the Book of Mormon. Reading this today made me remember a bookof his that did contain gay themes and I had to look it up. I remembered that the gay characters in the book wanted to take advantage of the beautiful young male character, and they were portrayed as crude individuals with no sefl-control. I found this at wikipedia on his “Songmaster” books:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songmaster

  25. cowboy
    August 1, 2008

    I’m fascinated by how some seemingly intelligent people can equate homosexuality as just a temptation. (From reading about Orson. S. Card in widipedia.)

    What shouldn’t surprise me, though: his total devotion to what his Prophet says. There is no questioning the Standard Works (Bible, Bof M, D&C, Pearl of Great Price) in Mormon theology. Nor can you vocally or demonstratively do anything against the pronouncements from the First Presidency of the Mormon Church. The letter commanding the Saints to work for California Proposition 8 comes from the Prophet and First Presidency. It is heresy and nigh on a step towards formal excommunication if you do say or do anything against the will of the Prophet. There is no questioning the edicts from the Prophet.

    Add to this fact, most Mormons believe the U.S. Constitution is divinely inspired and there is faith-promoting rumor which suggests a Mormon will come to the rescue of the U.S. Constitution in the latter days. (Now can you understand the fervor in Mormon circles across this country if/when Brother Mitt Romney is selected as the veep with McCain?! That gorgeous family of his and his hair is story-book perfect for the man who saves the United States.) Brother Card is part of this. The ideology and myths are engrained in the minds of the faithful Saints.

    Or, maybe Orson is scared of really what would happen to his livelihood if all his books were removed from the shelves at all the Deseret Book bookstores if he wrote about toleration of homos in his novels. This is his cash-cow. You have to realize his considerable sales in the LDS bookstores.

    It’s hard to truly know what motivates Mr. Card and his screed against homosexuals. It’s probably partly fear from losing a good living with selling his books at church-approved bookstores and partly because of blind obedience to the dogma he was raised in.

    Or: he’s a crazied religious zealot who happens to write good fiction once in a while. Pay no attention to the man when it comes to politics.

  26. Jody Wheeler
    August 1, 2008

    I have to admit that I’m a bit surprised by the number of people who are suddenly announcing their intent to never read Card’s books (again) and even divest themselves of any books written by him that they currently possess. I certainly acknowledge everyone’s right to do so if that’s their choice. But at the same time, I have to wonder if it’s an entirely wise choice.

    I’m actually more concerned that he not get a nickel of new money, money that will, either directly or in a round-a-bout way, go to supporting Prop 8.

    Marvel Comics is releasing a comic adaptation of ENDER and there are new video games planned for the IP. Guess where part of those license fees to Card are going?

  27. PiaSharn
    August 1, 2008

    I’ve never read any of Card’s work, which is a bit odd since I spent a good deal of my adolescence with my nose in a sci-fi or fantasy book. I knew who he was, and I always meant to pick up a copy, but I never seemed to get around to it.

    Then I started coming across his homophobic rants, and it really squelched any desire I might have had to read his work. I know that I should judge an author’s stories on their writing abilities, not on their political beliefs. But reading a book by someone with such hateful beliefs would just leave a bad taste in my mouth.

    His arguments really are ridiculous, though. If he truly believes that the government shouldn’t change the definition of marriage, does that mean that we should roll back all of the changes made over the years? Should we allow only the marriage of a white man plus a white woman, since that’s how marriage was defined when this country was founded?

  28. Duncan
    August 2, 2008

    How much French do you people know? Something being done the way someone famous would is “à la”. An armed takeover of the government by domestic forces is a “coup d’état”.

    I would also like to second Jarred: these books can still be read with a critical eye, to gain insight into his thinking. At the very least, we can find out about who we’re up against.

  29. Jason D
    August 2, 2008

    “I would also like to second Jarred: these books can still be read with a critical eye, to gain insight into his thinking. At the very least, we can find out about who we’re up against.”

    Duncan that would only be true if there were some mystery or enigma to his anti-gay screeds. There is none, it lays it all out. He’s made it very clear what we’re up against: extremist lunacy.

  30. Bruce Garrett
    August 2, 2008

    have to admit that I’m a bit surprised by the number of people who are suddenly announcing their intent to never read Card’s books (again) and even divest themselves of any books written by him…

    Reminds me in some ways of the controversy over composer Richard Wagner. Apart from Mark Twain’s classic putdown, that Wagner’s music was better then it sounded, the man was a committed, even vitriolic antisemite. Many critics say that his work is inseparable from his hatred of Jews. Yet there are others who say that if Wagner’s antisematism bothers you that’s your problem.

    For me, the problem is like finding out your lover wears a Klan robe nights they’re not with you, and burns crosses on people’s lawns, or that the gifts they bought for you were payed for with money they’d robbed from banks. You feel betrayed. And…dirty.

    That Card is a good writer, only makes it worse, not better. It makes him good at manipulating my feelings and I really don’t want my feelings to be manipulated by someone who wishes I didn’t exist. We let art inside, into a place deep down. There has to be an element of trust. That you aren’t being lied to. That this person isn’t just pushing your buttons for the sake of making money…or worse…just because they can. When the creator of a beloved work of art turns out to be a creep, you wonder how much of what was said to you was real. You feel a bit…used.

    I’ve been a voracious reader since I was a kid, though my intake of fiction fell off quite a bit in recent years. Books were my main avenue of escape back in grade school and the old favorites occupy special places on special shelves. My life has been full of books. But over time I found there were some I had to let go of, because I simply could not believe in the stories they held anymore.

  31. Jarred
    August 2, 2008

    Jason: And yet many of us follow sites (such as BTB) which have as a primary purpose to follow much of the same screed as it’s constantly put out by Paul Cameron, PFOX, the AFA, and many other organizations and individuals. Despite the fact that these organizations and individuals demonstrate the same lunacy, we read, dissect, and comment on just about every press release and public statement they make. I don’t really see the difference.

  32. Jason D
    August 2, 2008

    “Jason: And yet many of us follow sites (such as BTB) which have as a primary purpose to follow much of the same screed as it’s constantly put out by Paul Cameron, PFOX, the AFA, and many other organizations and individuals. Despite the fact that these organizations and individuals demonstrate the same lunacy, we read, dissect, and comment on just about every press release and public statement they make. I don’t really see the difference.”

    These are two completely different things. The AFA writes lots of things, but BTB only covers the anti-gay aspects. If Dobson writes children’s books, for example, there is not likely to be a review here unless there is a section about gays. If Paul Cameron writes epic poetry in his spare time, I doubt it would be covered here unless, again, it is of an anti-gay nature.

    Suggesting we keep up on the fiction of OSC because we keep up on his public rants is not comparable to BTB’s coverage of Cameron and the lot. You seem to have missed the mission and goals of BTB, at least as I understand them, if you seriously think a PFOX-written book of recipes, or a AFA kids workout video, or the novels of Card are worth keeping up with as we keep up with their public condemnations of gays.

    I don’t think there’s any nuances to his public rants that can be further dissected by analyzing the stories he makes up. There’s nothing subtle about his opinion on gays, I seriously doubt his work will somehow reveal any hidden nuggets of insight.

  33. Jarred
    August 2, 2008

    You seem to have missed the mission and goals of BTB, at least as I understand them, if you seriously think a PFOX-written book of recipes, or a AFA kids workout video, or the novels of Card are worth keeping up with as we keep up with their public condemnations of gays.

    Let me see if I understanding what you’re saying. I perceive you to be saying that there’s no need to read his novels in order to understand his anti-gay views because his novels have nothing with his anti-gay views. Is that correct?

    If that is your position, and if your assertion is correct (something I doubt, but not having read any of his books, I’m willing to accept your assertion for now), then rejecting his books solely on his anti-gay position is still silly. If his novels and his anti-gay views are truly separate, then his anti-gay views are irrelevant when considering the value of his novels. Under such conditions, I’d suggest that the books should be judged solely on their own merits, not on unrelated biases the author may hold.

    But you would prefer to avoid his books altogether. And I respect your right to do so.

  34. Jarred
    August 2, 2008

    Bruce: The comparison to Wagner is an interesting one. Of course, the important thing to remember is why so many of Wagner’s critics consider his musical works to be inseparable from his anti-semitic views. Wagner’s works were operatic adaptations of a major piece of Germanic folklore. This is the same folklore that the German nationalists were using to inspire, encourage, and incite extreme nationalism and growing anti-semitism among the German people. In fact, Wagner specifically developed his operatic works to aid in this process. It’s no wonder his critics wonder whether his works can be separated from that ideology. After all, his works were meant to promote that ideology.

    But would Wagner’s critics make the same argument if Wagner’s “great works” had been a line of cookbooks instead?

  35. John
    August 2, 2008

    I really enjoyed Enders Game and have recommended it to others including my kid, who ironically asked me about the book yesterday. I haven’t read any of his other books, and wasn’t aware of his homophobia until reading this post.

    I told my kid yesterday that if he wanted to re-read Enders Game, we could pick it up at the library. I also told him that the author has kinda gone off the deep end with crazy political positions and I didn’t want to support him. I also said that I didn’t think Enders Game had any objectionable content.

    Then, my kid reminded me that there were curse words in the book, and he was surprised that I had recommended the book when he first read it. He did like the story, and I never made much note of the profanity.

    Hadn’t really thought of the author in years.

  36. Jason D
    August 2, 2008

    “Let me see if I understanding what you’re saying. I perceive you to be saying that there’s no need to read his novels in order to understand his anti-gay views because his novels have nothing with his anti-gay views. Is that correct?”

    I don’t know whether he condemns gays in his books or not. I’m saying his views are not complex, they are not nuanced, they do not need further inspection to understand them. They are plain, simple, direct. If I understand your point, you suggest that reading his books might give us more insight as to his views — as though his rants were vague and ambiguous. This might also help create a useful dialogue. I found nothing in his column to be unclear or in need of further reading to understand his points. I also DO think someone who (even casually) suggests revolt against our government is beyond a call for dialogue, they are calling for action. My point is that his views are direct and easy to understand on their own.

    “If that is your position, and if your assertion is correct (something I doubt, but not having read any of his books, I’m willing to accept your assertion for now), then rejecting his books solely on his anti-gay position is still silly. If his novels and his anti-gay views are truly separate, then his anti-gay views are irrelevant when considering the value of his novels. Under such conditions, I’d suggest that the books should be judged solely on their own merits, not on unrelated biases the author may hold.”

    I didn’t say they were truly seperate, in fact I think it’s impossible to seperate them because they come from the same source, the same person. I said that one would not help us understand the other. I also said that I doubt dialogue could be started with him, as his articles suggest he is interested in compliance, not compromise. For example, having read his views that our government should be overthrown if Prop. 8 does not pass — I know nothing about his novels. I know nothing about his ability to craft a plot, or create believable and interesting characters.

    “But you would prefer to avoid his books altogether. And I respect your right to do so.”

    Thank you. I know this may not make sense to you, but I vote with my wallet left and right. I check out the views and activities of merchants, actors, etc. I believe I have a right to decide what my money goes to support. I refuse to see Mel Gibson or Tom Cruise movies because of their decidedly anti-gay views. I stopped buying bolthouse farms drinks when I found out they were supporting prop 8. I convinced the receptionist at my last job to stop buying gloria jean’s coffee for the office because they support an ex-gay group that believes in exorcism. I refuse to buy anything made by Abercrombie & Fitch because of their blatantly racist advertising and hiring practices. I believe it’s not just important to speak up and rally support, I think it’s also important to watch where my money goes. I think it’s counterproductive to vote and stand for equality and then spend half my paycheck on food, services, and entertainment made by people who don’t agree that I’m a full citizen of this country. Why not skip the middleman and send my cash directly to FRC, AFA, FoF? I know not everyone wants do spend the time to do this, but I figure it’s one way to make a difference.

  37. Bruce Garrett
    August 2, 2008

    But would Wagner’s critics make the same argument if Wagner’s “great works” had been a line of cookbooks instead?

    Like, The Joy Of Aryan Cooking?

    I think the question is more like, if Wagner had aspired to be a master chef could he have kept his prejudices out of even that line of work, or would he have had to drag it into that too? If you haven’t seen how many ways the hard core haters can inject their hostility toward gay people into just about everything they set their hands to you haven’t been in this struggle long. For some people, their hatreds are the bedrock of their world.

    Suspect any food grown in poisonous soil. Especially food for the soul.

  38. Samantha Davis
    August 2, 2008

    If he were a chef I would expect him to spit in my entr’ee.

  39. Mucklucky
    August 3, 2008

    I have read a good deal of Card’s books. He’s gone from being interesting to a hack of major proportions. The odd thing is, his books (almost to a one) have some sort of homoerotic feel to them.

    Maybe he’s just another sad closet case? I’ve not taken the time to read the screeds linked here (and won’t as I don’t need to watch him wallow in such a sad state).

    I also won’t say I’ll not read any more of his books, because I stopped reading him years ago. His ability to create meaningful, interesting fiction has been destroyed by the need to churn out book after book.

    That he’s a raving loon (and possibly another one of those who hate what they will not allow themselves to be) has little to no bearing on this. His books (specifically almost any of his stuff after Speaker for the Dead) are just not well done.

    Not that he’s the first author who has been raped by the almighty dollar. Nor is he the first to show off his dirty underwear in public. Sort of like when I realized that Heinlein wasn’t nearly as progressive as he sounded in his books.

  40. Suricou Raven
    August 4, 2008

    Authors do change over time:

    Piers Anthony went from respectable to super-hyper-mega-pervert.
    Orson Scot Card has turned into a raving loon.
    L.R Hubbard… well, that depends how much of his later works he actually believed in. He was either crazy, or one hell of a con artist.

  41. NancyP
    August 4, 2008

    The short story Ender’s Game was a decent one, if rather obvious even at the time (child raised in what amounts to a video game school, with a bit of kung fu master thrown in). One type of successful short story needs punch but not much characterization or pacing, and he was starting out reasonably well. I gather he didn’t provide the extras in his long-form writing.

  42. Randy
    August 5, 2008

    WOW! I have read his ender series, I really liked it. Out of it I got the idea of Love being the main and important force in the universe and that tolerance for others must be paramount… I hate when I find out stuff about authors I thought I knew….

  43. Ephilei
    August 5, 2008

    Beautifully ironic! Western Civilization is destroyed after all . . . by the heterosexuals!

  44. cowboy
    August 9, 2008

    This even made the monologue on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. This kind of P.R. is not helping the Proposition 8 folk in California. This should be where we can show a link of the irrational religious zealous in Utah as one of the crazed proponents of Proposition 8.

  45. Nemo
    August 11, 2008

    Ender’s Game features young men wrestling each other in the shower, naked, while covered in soap. Methinks Card has some issues.

  46. Grigorii
    November 13, 2009

    Glad to found this interesting article. Never knew this, but its logged with me now. I never read many of his books anyway. How I found this site was searching “anti gay scifi writers” since I wished to post some horrid finding in a LeSprague De Camp book I was reading which stated gays must be kept away from any boys because they were all potential molestors. Just sick stupdity!

  47. Samuel Adams
    July 9, 2013

    Why do we care what a sci-fi writer thinks about civil marriage?
    What about being a sci-fi writer makes his views on this matter count for anything?

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

Back to top
mobile desktop