Card's Intergalactic Medicine Show

grammar fascist writes "Orson Scott Card's Intergalactic Medicine Show, a science fiction / fantasy webzine, went online just yesterday. Card, the editor-in-chief, has stayed true to his ideals: quality stories, author's rights, and trust in people's honesty. New stories are released quarterly, with new column installments added monthly to the current issue. New art is created for each story. There isn't even an attempt at draconian content control. Writers and artists give exclusive rights for one year - after that, limited rights. Card wants your stories and art, not your copyrights. I've finished the first issue now, and the stories are great. "Eviction Notice" made me cry, and I laughed out loud at "Loose in the Wires." I paid my $2.50 initially to support the business model, but the stories themselves are worth it."

Comments

Pffft...Mormons

[BushCheney08]

Card, the editor-in-chief, has stayed true to his ideals: quality stories, author's rights, and trust in people's honesty.

Pffft. Leave it to a Mormon to actually implement a business model that respects the work's creator...

(I just spent last week in SLC. Can't say I agree with a lot of their views, but they are a very nice bunch of people.)

Re:Pffft...Mormons

[syrinx]

Yes, because Bush personally could have done a whole lot, such as keeping the water out of the flooded areas by plugging the holes in the levees with his fingers. Or teleporting people out of the area WITH HIS MIND! If only he had been there!

(If you're just interested in useless symbols, take a college English class.)

a very nice bunch of people

[wiredog]

And they don't go to extreme lenghts to try to convert you. Once it's clear that you're not interested they leave you alone.

Dude, me too.

[gomel]

And I just counted that I have 14 books by OSC on the shelf next to my elbow. So sad. I even met OSC twice at book fairs.

Recently I read some right-wing lunatic, post-9/11 columns by him. No attempt at reasoning, only 'must follow the leader; dissent is treason' kind of diatribe. That's when I noticed that he is an authoritarian.

Did you notice that in his books, democracies are the weaklings and loosers, and the strong (or shrewd) win? And what's with this fascination with genocide?

Re:Dude, me too.

[halltk1983]

I actually pulled from his book something very different. I had to read the book a few times, but there are definate undertones where he comes across shadowing the authoritarian Hegemony as a Bad Thing(TM). Such as the rejection of religion, the punishments for more than two children, and espescially the monitoring of all children. More so he shows how such things as these negatively affect those under it's influence, ie the difficulties the parents have with religion (baptism of the children and ensuing arguements), how many children they have (the obvious discomfort of not having more in the face of the financial burdens) the fact that Ender as a "third" could not have gotten an education without support from the government, as though "thirds" are lower life forms than the others, and even the intolerance proliferant through the system against these "thirds" shown even by the children and the system's refusal to put an end to it. I think Ender's Game shows clearly what is wrong with an authoritarian government and is a strong testament of why we need a government that does not squelch us.

Re:Dude, me too.

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out David Weber's works for instance. Democracy is just something that gets in the way of chain of command in those books, and it usually does whatever the worst thing possible would be.

Ttue. Weber doesn't think very much of Democracy, with the "Peeps" (the bad guys) being modelled on a weird combination of the United States and the French Revolution. But then again, he doesn't think very much of the British-style Monarch he's created, either. It's just that few people see that he doesn't like any system of government because his Star Kingdom is the "good guy" of the moment. All you need to do is look at all the Earls and Prime Ministers, and other "evil" characters he's created to see his real position. Which is (to put it succintly): Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

That being said, I don't think Weber has a full grasp of the US Federalist Democracy. While Socialism has definitely been a powerful rot on the powerhouse that has traditionally been the US government, he tends to miss how truly powerful the US Constitution is in our law. Not to mention the fact that enough people care to cause a revolt when the socialist programs get out of hand. It's amazing how fast our government has been flipping between democrats and republicans in an attempt by the public to balance the views. :-)

Alternatives

[Heddahenrik]

If you just want to read/look at scifi stories and art, Elfwood http://www.elfwood.com/ is much easier to access, and it's free. And at the spin-off sites like Elftown http://www.elftown.com/ and Writersco http://www.writersco.com/ you can have a much more intime conversations with or between the writers and artists. But there are also some pretty bad amateurs there, but many see that as a feature, not a bug.

Re:Deal With It

[Scrameustache]

Orson Scott Card is a great writer, but he's also an insane rightwing religious fanatic.

I think he's neither.
He's a writer who's done some good work, and he's a right-wing believer, but I don't think he's great, nor is he a fanatic as far as I've seen.

The last I read of his was the "Worthing Saga", which featured a race of ubermen recognised by their blue eyes... yeah, er, that's nice Orson, reeeeal nice.

Oh, bloody please

[Moraelin]

Disclaimer: I'm an adept of "do whatever the fuck you please, as long as it's in the privacy of your home, and between consenting adults". I'm not opposed to your being gay, or whatever else you want to be. This time however, I'll basically also add "but fucking _keep_ it to the privacy of your own home, and leave the rest of us out of it already, because I'm already tired of the 'waah, you're a nazi if you don't support us' guilt-tripping."

So where should I start? He's a "rightwing religious fanatic"? Well, how about you support that claim? Because in that article you linked to, I've seen him actually argue his point of view without needing to base it on "God said it's wrong". So how the heck is it religious fanatism? He bases his argument on some things that are technically true, too. Things like:

1. That it's a redefinition of the word "marriage" to mean something it never meant before. It's true. Marriage always meant something involving a man and a woman. Anything else is an extension of the meaning. Now you may argue that it's a logical extension, and that it doesn't do anyone any harm, and we can even aggree on that. But an extension it is.

2. That you did have the exact same rights as heterosexual people, including, yes, the right to a heterosexual marriage. It may not be the kind of right you wanted, but technically you had the same rights. (Same as technically if homosexual marriage is allowed, heterosexuals have that right too. They might not want to exert that right, but they have it.) What you wanted was a _new_ right, that noone else had. Again, it may be a logical one, or one that doesn't harm anyone, and we can even aggree there, but it _is_ a new one.

3. Passing laws and granting new rights is a privilege of congress, not of a judge legislating from the bench. The courts of law are the branch that should apply the existing laws, not the ones that make new ones as they see fit. Separation of powers in the state is there for a reason, and let's keep it that way.

So how about you address those, if you really wish to discuss that, instead of reaching for the canned "insane rightwing religious fanatic" ad-hominem? (And if not, why did you bring it up?)

Because it seems to me like all three are technically right. Again, I'm not opposed to your getting that right. Makes sense to me. But the bullshit verbal fallacies (i.e., a whole argument based on redefining what a word means), ad-hominems, and endless guilt-tripping attempts based on those verbal falkacies, _are_ starting to get my goat. If you want to make your case, make it logically already, and not by fallacies. Verbal, ad-hominem, guilt by association (e.g., don't read his books because he's one of the homophobes), or otherwise. Or in other words, ffs, be honest for a start: if you want a new right, say just that, don't pretend someone was denying you something everyone else had.

And judging from the page you linked to, basically that's the same thing that Orson Scott Card was having a problem with too: that verbal fallacy involved. Hence the Humpty Dumpty reference. Can't even say I blame him for getting annoyed at hearing the same fallacy over and over again.

And you know what? It might even make your cause a lot of good to be honest for a change, and make a logical case instead of the whole "waah, I'm a victim" guilt trip. A lot of us couldn't care less what you do in your home. Sure, marry another guy, if that makes you happy. But if you act like an attention-whore, attention you'll get. And sometimes of the annoyed kind. If you scream the same fallacy (i.e., lie) again at people often enough, you've just insulted their intelligence and you've just lost their sympathy. Yes, the average human might be an idiot, but if you keep treating him like one and make your whole argument based on word-plays, he'll catch on to it. Just something to consider.

spelling error on page 1 of story

[Anonymous Coward]

I glanced at the first page (the free preview) of "Eviction Notice", since the submitter raved about how good it was.

I noticed "Dukes of Hazzard" was misspelled as "Dukes of Hazard". That's about as good a sign of quality as newspapers which have typos in their headlines.

(Posting anonymously since I'm not terribly proud of the fact that I knew off the top of my head that Hazzard has two z's. But hey, it's better than ranting about OSC's political views or about Paypal.)

Re:Deal With It

[Doc Ruby]

Moderation 0
    40% Informative
    30% Troll
    10% Flamebait

OK, "Troll" is par for the course, just another TrollMod from Card fanboys who can't even write a rebuttal, and need to stay anonymous. But "Flamebait"? Orson, is that you? Surely you can do better than that. Like maybe a compelling few paragraphs told in the voice of a child leading a global war against his brother, for the love of his sister? You kinky bastard.