(Untitled)
I recently came across this essay, Creating the Innocent Killer by John Kessel, which is a really intriguing discussion of some of the ethical problems in and with Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game.
Like a lot of other people I know, I once loved the Ender series, but, rightly or wrongly, I began to like it less when I heard about Card’s extreme right ( Read more... )
Like a lot of other people I know, I once loved the Ender series, but, rightly or wrongly, I began to like it less when I heard about Card’s extreme right ( Read more... )
I think the problem is that reading fiction, especially very well written fiction, is a very intimate experience-- you're allowing this writer to make you imagine things, make you see things in your mind, when usually your imagination is your private property. For this to work well, there has to be a certain amount of trust, which I think is entirely separate from skill or talent. If you know, or suspect, that the book is building up towards an idea that you really disagree with-- not that the idea's going to be explored or discussed, but more that it's going to be proved and supported-- then it's really difficult to have that trust.
In nonfiction it's different--you're just listening to a lot of arguments and you can agree or disagree as you like. In fiction, you're giving the writer access to your imaginative landscape, and I really do think it's an entirely different experience.
I do hope you'll give Pullman another chance one day, though. His books definitely have issues with organized religion, but I don't think they're that far off from you. The themes aren't as atheistic as a lot of people say they are-- I think Dust ends up sharing a lot of characteristics with the idea of a benevolent god.
Anyway, I've rambled a lot, but I'm glad we finally kind of agree about Card. I remember our bio conversations-- mostly in notes while Mr. Fung endlessly read out loud from the overhead projector. Good times.
Reply
Leave a comment