Has anyone else been disappointed by an author?

[KESpires]

It certainly would. Those with the largest predisposition against gays are the same with the largest predisposition against abortion.

 

[The Procrastinator]

Ooo, there's a book in there somewhere! What would Orson Scott Card do??

I can actually imagine well meaning religious right folks having the baby and determining to train it out of being gay, through love.

 

[KESpires]

Which would just lead to a life of misery and pain, for all concerned.

With all that being said, I'm glad that OSC says what he feels. He isn't overly concerned about left-wing reaction, and some of his beliefs fall into the left-wing category. It is good that people like him speak out, on whatever the case, so we remember that people are solidly right or left. Most of us sort of tread water in the middle.

That's why when asked whether I'm a republican or democrat I say neither. I'm just screwed.

 

[Ursa major]

Two short points.

• Regarding an author's views: I read books/listen to music/whatever based on the intrinsic qualities of the book/work/whatever. If an author's views are truly repellant, I'd probably borrow the book rather than buy it. (Turn the question the other way round: would you buy an awful book - by someone you didn't know personally, that is - merely because you thought they were verging on sainthood? I wouldn't.)

• As to what is or isn't natural: most of daily human life is very unnatural, e.g. cooking, clothes, deodorants. I must say, though, that life would be pretty awful without them (and a lot of other things). People can have whatever views they like; they can even make rules for their private societies based upon these rules; but basing the rules of society on the prejudices of one group is never going to work well, not in a free society.

 

[KESpires]

Which would just lead to a life of misery and pain, for all concerned.

With all that being said, I'm glad that OSC says what he feels. He isn't overly concerned about left-wing reaction, and some of his beliefs fall into the left-wing category. It is good that people like him speak out, on whatever the case, so we remember that people are solidly right or left. Most of us sort of tread water in the middle.

That's why when asked whether I'm a republican or democrat I say neither. I'm just screwed.

Ok, that was supposed to say most people aren't solidly right or left.

I have got to start checking my stuff before I post it.

I agree with you Ursa Major. It's like I said in my first response. I've decided, in my own little globe of morality, that a person being homosexual is really no different, in a natural sense, than my insistence on eating oreo cookies dipped in milk.

Now, I wasn't born with a predisposition to eat the oreos. I just like to eath them. Homosexuals, however, were born with a predisposition. So, again in my own little globe, I'm the bigger "sinner" because I can decide not to eat oreos. They can't decide not to be gay.

 

[Ursa major]

I have free will when it comes to buying Oreos; but once they're in the house, my free will seems to desert me (which is why I don't tend to buy them in the first place).

 

[KESpires]

So what does everyone think about the gay marriage issue. I've been thinking about it and I think we need to convert our tax terminology so that instead of saying "Married: Filing Jointly" it just says that "Cohabitors: Filing Jointly".

Honestly, why even have married/unmarried people in different tax categories. Just let people that live together file together, claim dependents, etc., and I think most of the issue will go away. States that want to allow them to marry can, others that don't won't. But in the meantime, roommates, homosexual couples, hetero couples that live together and have children, they'll all get the same tax "benefits" that married couples get. That should stop a lot of the issue, I'd think.

 

[the smiling weirwood]

Well, I don't care about gay marriage because I don't believe in marriage. Its a fairly stupid social mechanism and completely independent of any sort of actual intimate bond. Its a social contract, and one I am not willing to enter into to, not even if Mr. Awesome were to propose to me right now.

But do I believe that *everyone* should have the same rights as everyone else? I absolutely do. The fact that some are denied those rights on a religious basis is unconstitutional and just plain wrong.

 

[The Procrastinator]

I'm not a huge fan of marriage either, but I can appreciate that there are people who are, so for them marriage is important. Gays should have the right to get married just like anyone else. Failing that they should at least have defacto rights so they're on an equal footing legally. In Oz, defactos have the same rights as married couples - is this the same elsewhere? (I have no idea but I'm guessing from KE's post that its not in the US?)

I don't get the Oreo thing either - but then Oz is home to God's own bickie, the Tim Tam, which makes Oreos look like a pale shadow. (Or should that be Satan's own bickie).

 

[Ilvian]

I read Ender's Game at 12 and it was a hugely formative book for me. I have a few of Card's books that have been signed and truly, he was a major role in my wanting to be an author. A childhood hero to be sure. Then I read Empire.

An interesting little book that really is not a completely difficult read even with a polar opposite ideology. However, a few things stick out. There are characters who kill people with no other justification than their being afflicted with liberal philosophy (which apparently advocates killing people?). Also, Bill O'Reilly has a bit part as a minor protagonist. (If you like Bill, great! I personally think he represents a scourge upon the Earth. Mainly due to the fact that some people take him seriously)

A few years later I was listening to talk radio while driving around (we get something like 3 dedicated stations of it in my small Montana town. hoooeee!) when a nice show called "the Rusty Humphrey Show" came on (whose theme music is "America! Heck Yeah!" of America: World Police fame, which they use without understanding the irony). I came in mid bit and a man was raving against the UN using an effeminate voice to caricature the US bending to the will of International Interests. When the host's voice returned to normal at the end of his high-pitched rant, he proudly proclaimed: "this is Orson Scott Card standing in for Rusty Humphrey, we'll be right back." I pulled over and had a nice bitter laugh over the assumptions we make about our childhood heroes.

I still am incredibly greatful for the gifts OSC's writing has given me. Any disappointment I feel over the fact that he has beliefs I feel are misguided and borderline dangerous is my own fault. Empire is the only time OSC has disappointed me as an author because it was less about the story and more about getting out a demonizing worldview. My other dissapointments in OSC are simply a product of asumptions made about the world as a 12 year old.

 

[dustinzgirl]

You know, I think that it is all right for Orson to think the way he does. People are not forced into joining the church. I don't like or dislike him for his personal religious opinion as he has a right to it. Now, if he starts kidnapping homosexuals and putting them through mormom anti homo camp, then yeah, I would have a problem with it.

We are also not going to go extinct due to homosexuality. Considering that we can now turn bone marrow into sperm and populate the world from a laboratory, as well as impregnate ourselves, heterosexuality is becoming fairly useless, other than to spread germs.

However, I can see how the argument that homosexuality is unnatural as it is in respect to the tradition of creating and keeping a family nucleus as it goes against thousands of years of human history. So that makes sense to me.

What I don't get is why, in this day and age, do people give a crap what someone does behind closed doors with other consenting adults? Hello, world famine, world recession, alien ships, cancer in animals, missing insects. Seriously world, we have more important things to freak out about.

 

[biodroid]

I feel that an author should keep religion out of his books. If I wanted to read about religion I would get a magazine or buy a bible. I am an atheist and respect all peoples beliefs but I feel that that belief should not be "forced" onto a person. OSC I think kind of slanders some religions which I find irritating. I read 2 of his books - Enders Game and Speaker for the Dead and started getting put off by his preachiness. I would like for him to tell a story and not give a sermon.

 

[The Procrastinator]

You can't tell someone what to write or what not to write, though. People will write what is in their hearts. You, as the reader, have the right not to read whatever you like.

 

[KESpires]

Exactly. OSC writes stories that are important to him and a great deal of his audience. If someone doens't like the story, they are free not to read it or return it within the window that some bookstores allow and decide not to buy another.

Personally, I think his views are misunderstood a great deal of the time. He's not a republican or a libertarian. He calls himself a communitarian. He has strong feelings about the global conflict we're in, and so do I. So do most Americans, whether they agree or disagree about our chosen methods of combat.

Also, as for the O'Reilly bit, I hadn't heard about that; I'll have to check that out.

I, personally, love his show. Compared to guys like Hannity and Levin, he's more moderate than most think. He's also not afraid to take up for someone getting shafted. I think that most people dislike him because he's the most popular show in that timeslot of all the cable news channels.

But the thing I like about him most is that he's honest about his position and honest about when he's giving opinion, not fact. That is a statement that can't be said for some other shows, notably on MSNBC or CNN. Commentators masquerading as journalists on those networks enjoy giving opinions as facts. Like when a CNN reporter "broke" the news story that Palin's child with down syndrom was "suspected" of being her daughter's child, and "sourced" a blog on a liberal site... Yeah, very objective.

But I don't want this to break down into a rant about political sides. OSC is doing what he feels is right in his pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. We'll all do the same. And hopefully when a lot of us are successful authors we won't get as much flaming hatemail.

 

[the smiling weirwood]

This thread was never meant to be "flaming hatemail" but rather an open query. That I disagree with his personal opinions is a given, but the original topic was the question of whether a similar disagreement has ever colored anyone's perception of an author's work.

 

[dustinzgirl]

This thread was never meant to be "flaming hatemail" but rather an open query. That I disagree with his personal opinions is a given, but the original topic was the question of whether a similar disagreement has ever colored anyone's perception of an author's work.

LOL

True.

Unfortunately I don't know how to type without sounding like an arrogant cuss word.

I'm really not so crass. Really. I'm a nice person.

 

[KESpires]

I don't mean this thread. I mean the kind of mail that OSC gets from angry fans who didn't realize he is a human who feels conservatively on some issues and liberally on others.

Not this thread. This thread has been very civil.

 

[the smiling weirwood]

I see. I'm sorry if I misunderstood your meaning, KESpires.

 

[biodroid]

I'm just saying according to this thread that his view points made me dissappointed but I will most likely carry on reading him sometime again in the future.

 

[weirdside]

If it bothers you, you have got to make the distinction between his work and himself. I personally don't mind his view because he's American and he can believe whatever he wants.