It seems to be a matter of degree, IMHO. The man contributed a lot to the work in question. Using said work does not mean that one supports the other ativities in which the man engaged.
True enough.
I still think it’s wrong. I think it’s laziness on the part of teachers and crap writing by OSC.
You think it’s wrong in that you wouldn’t do it in real life or in that you don’t think such a thing should ever appear in fiction?
This. I am LDS and think this guy is an ass too.
What? Never, ever never? You don’t know many Mormons then.
There was a short story OSC wrote that was the most blatant “doth protest too much” ever when someone mistakes him for gay and he assures the guy he’s not “weird”, does anyone know what I’m talking about? I’ve forever considered him a closet case after that.
Well, hardly ever.
[sub]my love of show tunes is manifesting more and more lately[/sub]
In real life I*** cannot sing ***and it’s shitty writing. I wouldn’t take a drug that would let me sing if it would render me sterile.
What appears in fiction is not anything I can help.
What exactly is shitty writing?
Then shame on you for writing from ignorance.
Shame on you. You live in a country that has freedom of speech. That means that he has the right to say them, and you have the responsibility not just to let him say them but defend his right to say them. Freedom of speech is a most precious thing, one which many people to this day do not know.
The fact is, what he does skates up to the line of shouting “fire!” in a crowded theater, which isn’t protected speech.
I read about a preacher in Sweden who did 30 days in jail this year for preaching anti-gay hate.
As far as writing from ignorance, I’ve probably read more of his fiction and non-fiction than anybody on this board. It’s all been a giant waste, too.
What rubbish. I find Card’s statements on this issue reprehensible, but this doesn’t pass the straight face test. Quartz is right. If you believe in protecting free speech, then you believe in protecting the speech that offends you the most. Otherwise free speech has no meaning.
I have to recommend John Scalzi’s blog (link to one of my favorite entries).
Back on topic, I liked some of Card’s stuff years ago, but it got too repetitive so I quit reading it. On the other hand, Harlan Ellison is a notorious jerk but I will read any of his fiction because it’s good stuff. I just don’t read anything of his that’s not fiction.
He has a right to say it, and everyone else has the right to express how they feel about what he says. Who is trying to take away that freedom? All I see is people calling an ass an ass.
Wishing death on someone so he could no longer exercise his freedom of speech seems awfully close to desiring to end that person’s freedom of speech.
There’s a huge difference between feeling that you wish someone had died before they became unrecognizably deranged and being sad about that (which is what the OP actually said) and wishing to curtail their freedom of speech. It’s apparently because he used to admire the man that he feels so much anguish about the lunatic rant. I don’t think this means he actually wants the man dead.
I don’t usually like to bump older threads, but this is only a few months old and the bump not worth another thread.
Card’s been in the news this week for holding a sort of olive branch to people threatening to boycott Ender’s Game because of him. The statement in its entirety:
I had not intended to see Ender’s Game anyway and it has nothing to do with OSC- it just doesn’t appeal to me. I also don’t think a boycott by gays/gay allies is going to sink it if it’s good enough, and I think the only reason Card made any statement is probably at the request of the studio (who probably also doesn’t expect to be financially hurt by any boycott but recognizes a great opportunity for free publicity when they see it and this was less icky than publicity over why the kids aren’t running around naked half the time like they are in the novel).
That said, while Card has my permission to go fuck himself of course, I love the increasing use of “criticizing my irrational bigotry is bigotry” defense the religious fanatics are increasingly using.
One of my favorite factoids about Card is his reverence for his his g-g-grandmother, Zina. She was ordered to leave her husband, Henry Jacobs, with whom she had a child, and marry Joseph Smith as one of his many secret polygamous spouses; when he was murdered she returned to her husband, whereupon she was ordered- again- in spite of being pregnant by her husband- again- to leave him and marry- again- the Mormon Prophet as one of umpteen secret polygamous spouses, the Prophet this time being Brigham Young. Zina and Brigham had a daughter, also named Zina, who was Card’s great grandmother. (Her first and only legal husband, Henry Jacobs, pined for her the rest of his life, but remained a devout Mormon; Zina made a sad comment about how women just had to realize that marriage wasn’t something they did for their own happiness.)
Card has written a novel about her and named one of his daughters for this ancestor, this adulterous or bigamous bride of two polygamists who lied about being married to her (Brigham Young eventually came out as a polygamist after Utah was settled and secure, but til then he- and Joseph Smith always- publicly denied polygamy). Of course if the current Mormon president Thomas Munson ordered a woman to leave her husband and be his plural wife he would be excommunicated and so would she, because God has changed his mind about what the ideal nature of marriage should be.
However, per Card, gay marriage is just weird and needs to be outlawed and a revolution started if necessary because it’s against social norms and all that’s right and nobody should have the right to practice a form of marriage that offends so many people. Until, at least, such time as God changes his mind about what’s allowed in earthly marriage again, which, per Card and the Mormon Church, God is wont to do.
A hijack perhaps, but, do writers often get points in movies? I can understand a JK Rowling or Dan Brown negotiating them, but I would doubt even most bestselling writers would have that kind of clout.
The reason I was wondering is that the best practical way for Card to minimize damage to the movie by the threatened boycott (which, again, I don’t anticipate being that great) would be to say “I’ve already been paid for my participation in the movie, so it doesn’t affect me one way or the other if you see the movie or not”.
But of course that’s only if it’s true, which I assumed it would be.
Sampiro - he’d still profit from the increased sales of his books, which will certainly happen if the movie is a success.