Slashdot Mirror
Ender in Exile
stoolpigeon writes "Orson Scott Card's work Ender's Game began as a novelette, which he says he wrote as a means of leading up to the full story he had developed, Speaker for the Dead. Ender's Game was published as a full novel in 1985, and won the Hugo and Nebula awards (as did Speaker for the Dead in '86 and '87). I think it is safe to say that Ender's Game is ensconced in its position as a science fiction classic. Now, 23 years later, Card has finished the first direct sequel to Ender's Game in his new novel Ender in Exile."
Keep reading for the rest of JR's review.
Ender in Exile
author
Orson Scott Card
pages
377
publisher
Tor Books
rating
7
reviewer
JR Peck
ISBN
978-0765304964
summary
A good midquel in the Ender's series
While Speaker for the Dead was published right after Ender's Game, there is a huge gap in time between the two stories. Due to the effects of traveling at close to light speed, thousands of years pass between the two novels. Chapter fifteen of Ender's Game does give an explanation of the events that fill that time. Card also went on to write other novels set in the Ender universe that do not involve Ender directly but rather other students from the battle school and family. This makes Ender in Exile more of a 'midquel', a term Card uses in the afterword, than a sequel. Because of this, from a high level view of the plot, readers who have stuck with the saga will not find much new here. This is a closer look at events already related in other books for the most part.
Card is an able author and this story is solid. Much of it reminded me of some of my favorite classic science fiction. There is colonization, extended periods of life aboard space ships, discovery of alien civilization and not much in the way of hard science. Card's primary purpose is to analyze and consider the human condition as opposed to exploring technological possibilities or theories. Almost everything that is highly advanced is the result of alien technology and is never explained or understood. Much of it functions on an almost mystical or magical level.
Ender is a young adolescent with an incredibly unique life and mind. In this novel we see him transitioning and growing from a youth into a man. I was often reminded of Herbert's Paul Atreides when he was first on the run in the desert with his mother in the book Dune. Ender is aware that he is different and has amazing capabilities but he is unsure just what the full ramifications of that difference are. He is trying to find his place in humanity and in the universe as a whole.
The story encompasses four basic plot lines that flow one to the next. I never felt any great sense of urgency or climax and resolution in the story. Really what it felt like was a thread weaving together pieces from the earlier stories. While the themes and issues were great, sometimes the characters were remote or the working of the issues very subtle. The most impacting and emotional moments relied upon knowledge of events from the other books in the series to carry their full force. In that light the novel is very effective. I think that fans of the Ender series, already biased towards this work, are going to be very pleased and enjoy Ender in Exile greatly. They are going to get to dig just a bit deeper into this world and it's primary character Andrew Wiggin. They will enjoy moments of discovery and the answer to questions that may have been in the back of their minds, possibly for the last twenty years or so.
On the other hand, someone new to the series may not be as enthralled and may find the story to be a bit flat. If I could I would rate this book in two ways. For those who have not read all the other Ender books, a 6 or 7. This is not bad since the book is designed to sit in the middle of an existing set of tales. It is possible that someone could pick this book up without having read a single Ender story or novel and track with it. I think they would even find it interesting if a little flat. But for a fan of the series with a high degree of familiarity with the characters and events of this world it is probably a solid 8 or 9. At the very least, Card has done nothing to tear down what he has built up but has completed a sturdy addition to the body of work.
In the afterword Card has some interesting comments to make about reader involvement in helping him to write this story. He also explains how he would like to approach some discrepancies between this story and what is related at the conclusion to Ender's Game. I thought it was a sign of the times that an author, facing a large and complex world he had created but could not track on his own, was able to use the internet to call upon readers assistance in achieving as much consistency as possible.
This is a thoughtful, well written book. It may even motivate some to dig up an old copy of Ender's Game so that they can relive the enjoyment of a classic and see what is new to find. I think that most will not be disappointed. Some may not be as thrilled as they would hope, but there is something here for any science fiction fan.
On a side note, in conjunction with the release of this new book, Marvel Comics is doing a limited series comic adaptation of the original Ender's Game novel.
You can purchase Ender in Exile from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Card is an able author and this story is solid. Much of it reminded me of some of my favorite classic science fiction. There is colonization, extended periods of life aboard space ships, discovery of alien civilization and not much in the way of hard science. Card's primary purpose is to analyze and consider the human condition as opposed to exploring technological possibilities or theories. Almost everything that is highly advanced is the result of alien technology and is never explained or understood. Much of it functions on an almost mystical or magical level.
Ender is a young adolescent with an incredibly unique life and mind. In this novel we see him transitioning and growing from a youth into a man. I was often reminded of Herbert's Paul Atreides when he was first on the run in the desert with his mother in the book Dune. Ender is aware that he is different and has amazing capabilities but he is unsure just what the full ramifications of that difference are. He is trying to find his place in humanity and in the universe as a whole.
The story encompasses four basic plot lines that flow one to the next. I never felt any great sense of urgency or climax and resolution in the story. Really what it felt like was a thread weaving together pieces from the earlier stories. While the themes and issues were great, sometimes the characters were remote or the working of the issues very subtle. The most impacting and emotional moments relied upon knowledge of events from the other books in the series to carry their full force. In that light the novel is very effective. I think that fans of the Ender series, already biased towards this work, are going to be very pleased and enjoy Ender in Exile greatly. They are going to get to dig just a bit deeper into this world and it's primary character Andrew Wiggin. They will enjoy moments of discovery and the answer to questions that may have been in the back of their minds, possibly for the last twenty years or so.
On the other hand, someone new to the series may not be as enthralled and may find the story to be a bit flat. If I could I would rate this book in two ways. For those who have not read all the other Ender books, a 6 or 7. This is not bad since the book is designed to sit in the middle of an existing set of tales. It is possible that someone could pick this book up without having read a single Ender story or novel and track with it. I think they would even find it interesting if a little flat. But for a fan of the series with a high degree of familiarity with the characters and events of this world it is probably a solid 8 or 9. At the very least, Card has done nothing to tear down what he has built up but has completed a sturdy addition to the body of work.
In the afterword Card has some interesting comments to make about reader involvement in helping him to write this story. He also explains how he would like to approach some discrepancies between this story and what is related at the conclusion to Ender's Game. I thought it was a sign of the times that an author, facing a large and complex world he had created but could not track on his own, was able to use the internet to call upon readers assistance in achieving as much consistency as possible.
This is a thoughtful, well written book. It may even motivate some to dig up an old copy of Ender's Game so that they can relive the enjoyment of a classic and see what is new to find. I think that most will not be disappointed. Some may not be as thrilled as they would hope, but there is something here for any science fiction fan.
On a side note, in conjunction with the release of this new book, Marvel Comics is doing a limited series comic adaptation of the original Ender's Game novel.
You can purchase Ender in Exile from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Yeah, kinda peaked at Speaker for the Dead, went downhill since. Cue XKFD comic but I'll let someone else whore for that karma.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Much as I enjoyed the Ender series, Scott Card has revealed himself to be a massive douche. I'm not buying or reading his books anymore.
Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
Card's primary purpose is to analyze and consider the human condition as opposed to exploring technological possibilities or theories. Almost everything that is highly advanced is the result of alien technology and is never explained or understood. Much of it functions on an almost mystical or magical level.
I always thought this was the point. In science fiction, the high technology is a plot device and how our interaction with said device describes aspects of human behavior is the story. I do not need to know how a technological fountain of youth works. I just need to know it makes people young again and requires something of a high cost personal cost, say the ability to feel love. How society treats the creator of this device, whether people who refuse to use it are ostracized by society, do people who use the machine experience regret? The dilithium crystal configuration of the device is irrelevant compared to those aspects of the story.
Just my two cents.
The cancel button is your friend. Do not hesitate to use it.
I would recommend reading all of the Ender stories first, then going back and reading the Bean stories second. While the two series are remarkably consistent; the Bean stories will change the way you think about the Ender stories. You realize that the monolithic messiah figures of the Ender stories are nothing of the sort, that their destiny is intertwined with that of all the other characters, major and minor.
On the other hand, Card has recently pressented himself as a bigotted asshat in regards to homosexual rights (I'm sure there will be other posts in this article that will link to the relevant information). So if you really want my advice; don't lend him more of a voice by purchasing his books. It's a hard decision, for myself included. I have been a huge fan of the series since I read Ender's game in middle school, but I will not be purchasing any more books of the series; it just doesn't feel right to support someone whose views clash so violently with my own.
It doesn't really jump around, and the published order is a good as any other. There are two story lines - the Ender Series which follow Ender he goes out into space, and the Bean Series that describe what happens meanwhile back on Earth. The stories in each series should definitely be read in order, but the two series really don't depend on each other or feedback into each other in any important way, so which of the two you read first (or in parallel) is up to you.
As far as quality goes, I'd recommend reading Speaker for the Dead first as I think it's the best book of both the series. I'd then read Xenocide next, just because it brings better closure to some important plot item in SftD, and is a decent story itself. Children of the Mind can be read last or skipped altogether without harm :P
The problem is that as you get further and further away from current science you end up more and more in the realm of "magic".
And if the writer is resorting to that, then the story is probably going to be pretty light and dependent upon plot contrivances to get the writer out of any corner he ends up writing himself into.
In the fountain of youth example, it could matter. How available is the process? Is it possible to restrict who gets it? What about pricing? Would there be wars over it with eternal youth offered as the plunder? Or is the secret something anyone can cook up in their kitchen using dandelions and shower scum?
Light stories are good for obvious moral statements (think "Twilight Zone"). But they tend to fall apart on anything longer.
The more basic the change is (eternal youth) the more ramifications it will have on society. And the less likely the writer will have addressed them. Or even thought of them.
Ender's game was never good.
Amen, brother. One of the lamest books of all time. When it won the Hugo and Nebula I realized that those awards no longer meant anything.
You can have my SIG when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Ender proves himself by posthumously baptizing all the souls of his victims, thereby justifying all the killing and giving the story a feel-good Hollywood ending.
Not in the article in 'Civilization Watch', but in his blog for the Mormon Times.
Link is http://mormontimes.com/mormon_voices/orson_scott_card/?id=3237
Personally, bigotry like this isn't enough, in itself, for me to reject a writer. But, it would certainly color my view of what he writes - any lessons or morals expounded in the book would have to be put to extra scrutiny in light of the moral defect of the writer (to put it plainly).
Why?
Ask the writer of the article that question, since I was referencing his opinion.
Orson Scott Card is a homophobe and douche? His life's work is meaningless to me.
Because he has opinions you don't like, his work's meaningless? That doesn't sound overly harsh/condemning to you? Card has many openly homosexual characters in his books, and I can't think of a single one that's a villain.
You, on the other hand, can't stand that he thinks homosexuality is wrong and speaks out about it, therefore anything he does is tainted. Congratulations, sir, you've successfully demonized people on the other side of the argument and made intelligent, rational discourse nearly impossible.
no one in Hollywood would risk offending the "gay" mafia nor would they dare go up against the inevitable boycotts and protests.
And I agree!
Would you buy a painting, no matter how great, from Hitler? (He was an artist when he was quite young I understand). Knowing his views, I certainly wouldn't and I'm neither gay nor Jewish!
This isn't a case of being P.C., it is a case of just being C.
I wonder if similar things were written back in the days of miscegenation?
Ruby Neural Evolution of Augmenting Topologies
eligion a fantasy (which may be true, but as many people forget, may not be true either, so there's not even a basis in fact for this claim)
And bigfoot might not live under my bed--but he also just might, as well! There's no basis of fact for either of these claims, right?
Honestly, I read his essay and his blog. He makes a very basic pro-marriage case and the only harsh words he has for anyone are reserved for the government:
'What these dictator-judges do not seem to understand is that their authority extends only as far as people choose to obey them.
How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn.'
He says quite clearly, 'Seen in this context, we are fools if we think "gay marriage" is the first or even the worst threat to marriage.
We heterosexuals have put marriage in such a state that it's a wonder homosexuals would even aspire to call their unions by that name.'
He's quite clearly against adultery, "no-fault" divorce, child abandonment, and cavalier attitudes towards the welfare of children as it relates to marriage. You'd find the same moral reasoning on marriage form anyone in communion with the Vatican, while you'd find the same political reasoning on government abuses by replacing "marriage" with "net neutrality" or "BitTorrent" on a random message board. He says you ought to raise your kids, they deserve a mom and a dad who believe in their marriage, and the government can take a long walk off a short pier if it wants to force people's kids to go to school and indoctrinate them into a definition of "marriage" that he sees as positively Orwellian doublespeak.
That's not a "hateful," "extreme," or "wingnut" position, unless we've truly reached the cusp of newspeak.
"I believe an important part of growing up is taking the bigger picture into account, and deciding who and what we support based on more than just our immediate personal result."
You realize, of course, that you're basically making the same argument that the social conservatives you so loathe are making... that there can be no co-existence with the other side, and the only answer is to boycott and blacklist their work.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
"You and I are here because our parents had sex, not because they were married, as many children born out of wedlock are every day. How does gay marriage threaten continued heterosexual reproduction?"
It doesn't, never suggested it did. But it does weaken the definitions of normalcy and family at a time they need to be strengthened. Sorry, but it's true, homosexuals are in the minority. Humanity may breed homosexuals, but it certainly does not encourage the creation of them in the same way a healthy virus will be sure not to overkill it's victims.
For instance, I have a young son. The LAST thing I would wish for him is to be homosexual. Not for the reason you probably think (because I will love him no matter WHAT he becomes), but because it's a hard life, and not fun being on the outer edge of society. No amount of can-banging and church gankings are going to change the basic facts of family, procreation, and marriage.
"Not seeing how gay marriage poses any threat to the continuation of the species...."
Again, you are missing the point, probably purposely. The point isn't necessarily procreation, but it's the legal and societal recognition of that unique distinction that men and women have.
Society defines what is 'normal' and clearly, most members of our society have decided that gay 'marriage' is NOT normal. Defining 'gay marriage' the way you want IS unique, but it is NOT progressive in any sense other than providing rights for partners, and I was already pretty clear on where I stand on that (civil unions).
And just why isn't that enough? Why must homosexuals force themselves and their lifestyle on the rest of us trying to raise families without the very definition of that being called into constant question? Today it's the gays, who knows what tomorrow will bring? There will be NO defense if the initial definition is weakened to the point of meaninglessness.
This isn't about some sort of civil right, this is about forcing an agenda on people who DO NOT WANT.
I know that goes against your particular 'religion', but that's the way it is.
"If you don't have a problem with gay couples having access to a legal arrangement that's functionally identical to marriage, then why do you have a problem with using the word "marriage" to describe it?"
Why must you take yet another word, if not institution, and claim it as your own? We let 'gay' go, why should we redefine 'marriage' as well? It is what it is, and what it is not is two people of the same sex coming together.
"What should those gay people have done in California? Not gotten married because they might be involuntarily divorced by referendum later on?"
Oh please, I weep not for homosexuals in California - ESPECIALLY in California. I'm sure they can handle it just fine. My guess is they have more rights than heteros do there.
I notice you failed to comment on the rantings, can-bangings, and church crashings. How is this helping 'the cause'?
By the way, I very much respect that you haven't turned this discussion into a joke. I've rarely been able to have this civil a discussion on this subject with anyone on the other side of it. It usually dissolves into name-calling and accusing the other side of either being right-wing, homophobic gay bashers or lefty communist child stalkers.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
I'm an unabashed snob and severe critic. I think the ridiculous idea that all things are of equal value needs to be rebutted early and often. But I'm not a troll. And I've been on Slashdot posting on a wide variety of issues for a long time.