I just read Ender's Game. I need someone to explain this one to me, is this like reading the Oddessy? Where you read it more to marvel at how ahead of it's time it was rather than how well it has stood up to the test of time?
Ender, or Baby Alex P. Keaton, is a genius six year old and the only hope for the future of civilization. His sister Valentine is empathy and compassion, Peter, his older brother, is the devil. They have all been groomed for their world-saving potential, but Ender is a stand out, just the right combination of his two polar opposite siblings.
And so they he must walk the lonely, apparently violent, Peter-like, road to leadership.
I certainly had my expectations for this book. I thought that in the end Valentine would be the one to save the world. I thought it would be a little bit of a morality tale about how being the alpha male is actually far less productive than we give it credit for. I was hoping that, in the end, humility and kindness would triumph over all, rather than manipulation and arrogance.
I was hoping Peter would get flung into outer darkness.
I really feel that I am missing something crucial about this book, because so many people like it. Not just like it. Love it. Want to marry it. Use it as an analogy for life and leadership. It's like the time when everyone was reading those Gerald Lund books that I hated. What's wrong with me?
I realize the guy is mormon, but just because we share the same religion doesn't mean I have to like what you do (I'm also talking to you, Steven Covey, what with your baldness and big smile and can-do attitude, you make me want to take a nap, and no, I didn't fill out the dream/goal section of my planner and you can't make me!)((I'm also talking to you, Stephanie Meyer, OK, I read all your books... (embarrassed shuffle)...and I liked them... nevermind.)). I realize that he predicted the internet, but even so, if I'm going to listen to a bunch of foul mouthed know it all kids I'll put down the book and hang out with my family.
Would someone please enlighten me? What is it? What exactly makes this self pitying, non-ending book so awesome?
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Why Ender's Game Sucks
Posted by don'tcallmelady at 4:07 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
![](<a href="http://segullah.org/sampler/"><img src="http://segullah.org/segullah_i_write.gif"></a>)
14 comments:
Saw your post on AS,
You are not crazy- this is just an awful book. I am glad a read it in retrospect because before it I had never had a book I hated. I would usually just not finish it. But it was for Book Club, so duty and all that.
Anyway at Book CLub I caused a little controversey when I stated my only wish was to have the seven hours back I spent on reading it. I will be on my death bed moaning, sputtering, I could've watched more Oprah with those extra hours, ate more cupcakes, flatironed my hair...anything would have been better...cough cough than that , that book...
Oh yeah my point, you are not alone, girl.
Yeah, just read Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow. They were "OK" they both could have been way shorter but the author insisted on boring us with a bunch of religious BS. The author is a Mormon apologist. What do you expect?
THE BOOK SUCKED
As others have said, you're not crazy. There is this love hate relationship many people have with Ender's Game. You either love it or you hate it. I'm one of the few people who fall in between. I don't hate the book. I see a number of good things within it, but I just do not think it deserves the cult status that has built up around it.
I can't help but think that those who think it is the greatest SF book of all time, read it when they were 9 years old, and enjoyed it for its wish fulfillment aspects. I read it only a year ago and, like you, simply did not get it.
The wild swings in viewpoint were, in my opinion, terribly distracting and I simply didn't find any of the "children" believable. This is actually one of the biggest criticisms of the book -- even among those who love it. The characters do not act like children, they act just like adults. It really is one of the most over rated books of all time, and I'm shocked that they are actually making a movie out it.
Now, I'm sure that you'll get someone telling you how wrong we all are etc. But every person has different tastes. And I simply admit that Ender's Game is not my cup of tea.
One of the posters above talked about the controversy they started in a book club; that seems to be the reaction of those who love the book and think its the greatest thing since sliced bread. The funny thing is, that even Orson Scott Card has admitted the book isn't that great and that he is thankful he isn't remembered for ONLY this book. Even the author, years later, can see the flaws in it. And supposedly, Speaker for the Dead (the "sequel" which is not really sequel) is much better.
PS: William Gibson's Neuromancer predicts the internet FAR better than Ender's Game, and in fact, the term "cyberspace" comes from Gibson himself.
I think yove missed the point. Ender didnt follow the "Peter" course. There is a subtle differrnce between the 2 brothers. Only by being manipulated could Ender ever have been successful.
Also, the children dont seem belivable because they are geniuses. They act like adults, in fact they are smarter than the adults.
Youre not crazy, but you missed the point.
No... Ender's Game sucks. These people didn't miss the point. Card is a mediocre writer at best. Seriously, I'm supposed to believe that a kid who had no problem beating and harming other kids and adults, abused authority and whatever suddenly realized he's a bad person because he blew up a planet full of aliens in a video game?
Or that I'm supposed to believe three kids somehow manage to take over politics, the military and the media?
This is escapist fiction of the worst kind, because it justifies bullying *because you're just genetically brilliant* and because it fails magnificently at communicating how complex the world really is. I don't care if you have an IQ of 240, three mega-geniuses are not taking over the world ever.
I just set the book down about 1/3 of the way through and I don't really have any intention of picking it back up again.
I just don't care about anything that's going on in the story. The author is skimming over important details and seems to have no interest in developing the world he's created. The mysterious conversations that take place at the start of every chapter don't intrigue me in the least bit.
I know this is a beloved book, but every character is bland and the plot is boring. I don't feel like there's any imagination put into in it.
I read one negative review where someone responded with something to the effect of "And yet you love Harry Potter." As if liking Harry Potter is an indicator of bad taste and that Ender's Game is a superior work of fiction.
It's really not.
J.K. Rowling took the time to describe her characters and their actions. I had a very clear image of what everyone in all 7 of those books looked like. When they played Quidditch, I knew the rules exactly.
Orson Scott Card does none of that. His character introductions (and the book as a whole) read more like an outline than a finished novel. It took me 100 pages to get a vague idea of what the kids are even doing in the battle room. They refer to the battles as games, yet I have no idea how many players each side has or even the basic rules of the game. If he took the time to actually describe these things, I would be far more on board. But he doesn't.
It shouldn't be this frustrating. I have 200+ pages left. I think I'm going to stop and move on to something different and better.
I just had to comment because a lot of the people here either don't understand sci-fi, have the comprehension of a 5 year old, don't know how to read, or are just closet homosexuals who hate card :).
I personally liked the book, now if you don't like the book that is fine, but using ridiculous logic on "WHY" you don't like the book is just too much for me to sit back.
I liked the book because it shows a character who is constantly bullied, he's a six year old prodigy but has to face adult circumstances. While some of the ideas are far fetched and like someone noted he does add a lot of religious bull, it's not heavily laid on as they claim.
What I really did not like is how fast the movie went and breezed through battle school. They skipped a lot of good points that helped with character development. I didn't like how they did Ender either, Asa just sucks portraying him.
The book is a good quick read. It is a little unrealistic that "2" child prodigies try to take over the world (technically they don't take over the world just gain a lot of influence) but considering it's far fetched in our standards doesn't mean it is completely impossible.
I just had to comment because a lot of the people here either don't understand sci-fi, have the comprehension of a 5 year old, don't know how to read, or are just closet homosexuals who hate card :).
I personally liked the book, now if you don't like the book that is fine, but using ridiculous logic on "WHY" you don't like the book is just too much for me to sit back.
I liked the book because it shows a character who is constantly bullied, he's a six year old prodigy but has to face adult circumstances. While some of the ideas are far fetched and like someone noted he does add a lot of religious bull, it's not heavily laid on as they claim.
What I really did not like is how fast the movie went and breezed through battle school. They skipped a lot of good points that helped with character development. I didn't like how they did Ender either, Asa just sucks portraying him.
The book is a good quick read. It is a little unrealistic that "2" child prodigies try to take over the world (technically they don't take over the world just gain a lot of influence) but considering it's far fetched in our standards doesn't mean it is completely impossible.
Well clearly the last poster is a fanboy of the worst sort. The kind of fanboy who is so romantically involved with a male character that he screams anyone who doesn't like that character or his fictional universe is a closet homosexual...repress much?
Anyway, this book was atrocious. Original poster you are not crazy! The plot is full of holes that Card takes no time to explain, almost to the point that you wonder if he even realized how awful of a job he was doing. As one poster commented Ender was only successful after heavy manipulation which to me, being fairly familiar with the Mormon faith, rings more true than any of the other religious overtones in the book.
Agree with you completely; reading this book makes staring at the wall seem exciting. This book is an exercise in self-pity at best. The author's ego-maniacal extended and ridiculous preface to the more recent edition simply adds to my bewilderment.
I have not read the book. I rented the movie from Red Box, based on the adult cast, I want my $1.25 back, I do not need my time back I bailed after 1 hour, it was HORRIBLE unless you are an 8 year old, or a pedophile. The children call each other sir and pretend to be like soldiers. I didn't watch all of it, but I would not be surprised to find out that the little boy and girl get married and have a baby after their "romance" after meeting. PU-LEEZ!!
Ender's Game is awful because it is an obvious Mary Sue character that only narcissists can relate to. Also the authors completely lack of technical, military, and scientific insight results in an exceptionally weak plot and mediocre world building absent of any depth.
This is before considering the insertion of his ham-fisted whining about his imagined religious persecution.
The big fundamental reason why Ender's Game is so terrible -- more fundamental than the nonsensical plot, blatant Mary Sue protagonist, or the fact that every chapter is just a blatant repetition of the one before it with the generic bully having a different name -- is its complete failure to portray the internal conflict that supposedly defines the main character. We're meant to see Ender as struggling to choose between his compassionate side and his ruthless pragmatist side, but we never see any evidence that his compassionate side actually exists. As far as we see, the ruthless side is all there is; the only time he takes a break from brutally killing anyone who looks at him funny is when he's wallowing in self-pity about how he keeps getting such irresistibly tempting opportunities to beat children to death. The only reason we know the author intended him to have a compassionate side at all is because one of the characters explicitly explains the themes to us about once every other paragraph.
Post a Comment