Just because a man has made one instant classic (That children will be reading in middle school for the next hundred years, and deservedly so), does not make him a good man, or a man worth listening to outside of his talent.
Orson Scott Card is a dangerous man, and what he's been doing with his editorials gets me so mad.
There's a reason I file his books next to my copies of Tim Lahaye and Hal Lindsay and Erich von Daaniken and Ayn Rand.
My wife objects, saying she doesn't think an author's insanity, even when clearly expressed in the works in question, should result in the filing of his work into the "dangerously stupid books" shelf.
For related reasons, she objects to my filing Heinlein and Bradbury nearby.
I've had it for years. I've got "Left Behind", "Satan is Alive And Well And On Planet Earth", "Vengeance Of The Tau", "Anthem", "Chariots Of The Gods", "Lost Boys".... a veritable cornucopia of crap!
I don't know the first three authors, but Rand isn't dangerous unless you think that high school and college kids won't outgrow Objectivism. And while I can understand Heinlein, I don't get Bradbury at all!
Tim Lahaye: "Left Behind" (http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/left_behind/index.html) Hal Linday: "Satan is Alive And Well And On Planet Earth" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Lindsey) Erich von Daaniken: "Chariots Of The Gods" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_astronaut)
Rand is dangerously stupid, like the rest on that shelf. We're talking about weapons-grade stupid, here.
I guess when I think of "dangerously stupid", I think of things that can cause actual damage in the real world if enough people believe in them. Enough people believe in the general outline of the Left Behind series that it truly is dangerously stupid. Same for Hal Linday. I'm not sure Erich von Daaniken could fit my own personal definition of dangerously stupid, but you seem to have a different definition than I do anyway.
For the record, your wife *also* thinks that there is no insanity detectable in a good chunk of his works (see his short story collections, and really, I'm not seeing it in Ender's Game), and has never bitched about where you choose to file Heinlein. Not that we have any Heinlein.
(Okay, I think I've got Starship Troopers and The Unpleasant Profession of Johnathan Hoag. And I *would* object to you filing the latter in the weird bookshelf, because the story about the hurricane cracks me up every single time. The former, I understand where you're coming from.)
Your wife, mind you, read huge chunks of H.P. Lovecraft's work without ever assuming that his portrayal of the unnatural and other was anything but a storytelling device.
Your wife tends very much to not see a lot of the bad in people. :)
I can read his essays and figure out OSC's asshattery myself.
However this blog anecdote was just that, an anecdote, and not a well-connected one at that.
"I had this friend? And she wrote an essay on how Ender was Hitler in disguise? And OSC didn't like it? And because of that, I almost got punched in the face by a completely different author!"
It's things like this that dissuade me from digging too deep into the lives of artists I enjoy; I might find out I hate them, while still being drawn to their work.
The man has a very high opinion of himself, doesn't he?
TBH, the only thing anyoene ver has to do to dicsount everything this grade a asshat says is just to print the filth he spews. 2 minutes lter everything he has written is pretty much debunked simply by evidence of the crack he must be on
I figured he hated women after reading two of his books, so I no longer read anything of his which means I never made it to Ender's game. Its the same reason I don't read hardly any Michael Criton, although I made an exception for Jurassic Park. People always point out MC's using a woman to make the run to turn on the electricity but I read his early stuff and I know he's just bowing to convention, a little.
Ender's Game is one of my verymostfavourite books.
It/he is the example I use when debating the whole slippery "can/should you appreciate A Thing Of Awesome(tm) even when it's made by an abhorrent nutjob?" issue.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 07:12 pm (UTC)Orson Scott Card is a dangerous man, and what he's been doing with his editorials gets me so mad.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 08:43 pm (UTC)My wife objects, saying she doesn't think an author's insanity, even when clearly expressed in the works in question, should result in the filing of his work into the "dangerously stupid books" shelf.
For related reasons, she objects to my filing Heinlein and Bradbury nearby.
We argue about this.
Because we are geeks.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 08:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 09:13 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 09:31 pm (UTC)The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
some James Dobson
Ken Ham
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 09:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 09:28 pm (UTC)Hal Linday: "Satan is Alive And Well And On Planet Earth" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Lindsey)
Erich von Daaniken: "Chariots Of The Gods" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_astronaut)
Rand is dangerously stupid, like the rest on that shelf. We're talking about weapons-grade stupid, here.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 04:47 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 04:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 06:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 04:34 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 04:47 pm (UTC)Greenspan was of the Milton Friedman school, which is much more Adam Smith than it is Ayn Rand.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 10:57 am (UTC)(Okay, I think I've got Starship Troopers and The Unpleasant Profession of Johnathan Hoag. And I *would* object to you filing the latter in the weird bookshelf, because the story about the hurricane cracks me up every single time. The former, I understand where you're coming from.)
Your wife, mind you, read huge chunks of H.P. Lovecraft's work without ever assuming that his portrayal of the unnatural and other was anything but a storytelling device.
Your wife tends very much to not see a lot of the bad in people. :)
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 07:58 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 11:56 pm (UTC)I can read his essays and figure out OSC's asshattery myself.
However this blog anecdote was just that, an anecdote, and not a well-connected one at that.
"I had this friend? And she wrote an essay on how Ender was Hitler in disguise? And OSC didn't like it? And because of that, I almost got punched in the face by a completely different author!"
WTF?
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-04 09:53 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 12:43 pm (UTC)TBH, the only thing anyoene ver has to do to dicsount everything this grade a asshat says is just to print the filth he spews. 2 minutes lter everything he has written is pretty much debunked simply by evidence of the crack he must be on
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 01:41 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 04:37 pm (UTC)It/he is the example I use when debating the whole slippery "can/should you appreciate A Thing Of Awesome(tm) even when it's made by an abhorrent nutjob?" issue.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-05-05 05:02 pm (UTC)