Reading Group: ENDER'S GAME Discussion

[vortexreader]

Hi everyone and welcome to the first Reading Group discussion. This month we'll be discussing Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card, one of the most loved and awarded novels of the last 20 years.

As I've said elsewhere: 'My aim in starting this group is to generate some intelligent and insightful discussion...this doesn't preclude controversy and confrontation. Good discussion only arises when there are opposing ideas so I would encourage everyone to be honest and forthright in their opinions. What I would hate to see is people just rehashing tired old ideas...think about what you are reading critically and don't be afraid to post your honest assessments.'

Below, I've listed a number of discussion points. Respond to them or ignore them as you wish!

(1) Ender's Game is often criticised for the way the children are portrayed. Critics claim that children just don't behave like that. Card responds by saying that as a child he 'never felt that my emotions were somehow less real than adult emotions and desires.' Are the gifted children of the novel portrayed unrealistically?

(2) Why is Alai's affection and friendship so important to Ender?

(3) What is the significance of the way Ender treats Bean?

(4) The children of the Battle School are exploited mercilessly yet the reader feels that this treatment is justified. Are there contemporary examples of child exploitation that could be compared to that of Ender's Game?

(5) There is a comparative lack of female characters in Ender's Game. Does this mean that the novel is really only about 'boys and their toys'?

(6) Is the character of Peter Wiggin believable? Is he meant to be larger than life as a counterpoint to the more grounded and likable Ender?

(7) What is your major criticism of the novel?

(8) In the context of the SF genre, where do Ender's Game and Card stand amongst the greats of the field?

(9) Card states in his introduction that the novel Ender's Game (expanded from the short story) was really just a means to the end of writing Speaker For The Dead. There is a definite shift in tone in the last chapter that is reminiscent of Speaker For The Dead. Does this mean that Ender's Game can't stand on it's own, that the reader must read Speaker For The Dead?

(10) What is the highlight of the novel for you? Which character or scene or philosophical point is most important to you?

To all of you who have shown some enthusiasm for this idea I hope you all enjoy the discussion to come and that it is the first of many more!

[Rob B]

It's been a few years, but I'll give it a shot:

(3) There are many reasons this can be considered significant. Ender may see Bean as a threat. Ender also may feel he has to act very stern and tough.

(5) Female characters--as the series progresses this changes. But for EG, it is much more than 'boys and their toys.'

(6) For the most part I thought Peter was believable.

(8) In the context of Science Fiction, I think EG is one of the best books I have read, and many would agree. It may be one of the most important, relative to the genre, of the past 20 years. Same goes for Card, but I think he may be in the top 5 for the past 20 years.

(9) I don't think you need to read SPEAKER, but I think you should. I remember liking SPEAKER more than EG, there were more emotional and (overall) powerful scenes in the novel for me.

(10) Without hesitation the ending was the highlight. I was reading at such a brisk pace. I really thought that it was just a test, when he destroyed the Buggers. I had to stop reading and re-read and absorb the fact that it was not a test and in reality, he did destroy the Buggers.

[Hobbit]

Ditto, vortex reader. I've read Ender's Game (about 20 years ago!) but never read the other novels. Nevertheless, thoughts are as follows:

(1) I see the point here, but I guess the counterargument is that we are not thinking of children in the 'now', are we?

In the future, with the idea of interplanetary war, children may need to mature earlier (some would say that that is happening now, already!) and so such mature thoughts may be possible - for some, if not for all.

(4) I could play devil's advocate here and say 'the education system' would be a good example of this, in the way that it forces children to conform and be educated... I'll leave that one for someone else to pick at!

(5) Again, I gather that this is adressed later in the series. Card may well have been saying something about the male child's competitive nature here and how they like to be 'on top', ahead of their peers, whilst girls are more prepared to think, evaluate and work as a team. (Yes, I'm simplifying and generalising here, but there are examples of this in most schools today.)

(7) Major criticism. Hmm. Not as preachy as some of Card's other work IMO, some of the situations in the book seemed a little forced if I remember right, though I did enjoy the book - at my young and impressionable age (!) I saw Card as a new Heinlein, writing for juveniles - clearly there's more to the book seeing it as an adult now. (Actually in much the same way as I see Heinlein, but that's another topic!)

It is a good book and worth reading at least once. I would give it a B or a B+. It is a book which deals with the emotions of the rite of passage and adolescence fairly well I thought. There are images in there I still remember today nearly 20 years on - the discipline and harshness of the Battle School for example reminded me at the time of school, for example (though I did read the original short story first and I do seem to remember that as being better - again, I was quite young there!). There's a lot in there about the nature of frioendship and comradely behaviour as well as the difficulties of shouldering responsibility, something which struck chords at the time of reading.

However, in terms of the 'big ideas' of SF, I would probably put people like Frank Herbert and Dan Simmons ahead.

If you look at the 'harder' SF, then something like Greg Bear's Darwin's Radio, which uses stuff about genetics I'd never realised until reading the book, or (some of) the work by people like Stephen Baxter is more awe-inspiring in the grander sense of the genre, IMO.

Where Card does score is in his characterisation - more of a Connie Willis than a David Brin (and no, that's not meant to be rude! )

Good one though, Vortex. Got me thinking!

Hobbit

[Vitriol]

1) Well, I know I've always considered my thoughts to be mature. Admittedly, I usually consider my previous thoughts of a year or so previously immature and stupid. I don't think that the portrayal is at all unrealistic.

3) I think this is one of the important things in the novel; Ender hates what the military are doing to him, but later finds that these are the best methods to develop a team, as he uses them himself.

9) I haven't read SFTD, and had no problem with Ender's Game

Unfortunately, I already knew that the final battles were real, which sort of spoilt it for me (read it in some forum). I'm not sure about a particular favorite scene. Perhaps when he defeats Bonzo's army, and then refuses to fulfil any of the rituals; he shows he is well aware that he is fighting the instructors, not the others. That the game is just that, a game, with no real significance itself.

Oh, BTW, here's some info on the upcoming film:
Official Website: http://www.frescopictures.com/movies/ender/
Fansite: www.angelfire.com/mo/Wiggin/Ender.html

[This message has been edited by Vitriol (edited March 14, 2002).]

[Kamakhya]

Ok...here goes.

1) Unlike others here, Card's portrayal of a 6 yr. old genius is utterly absurd at times. His first kill scene, while certainly understandable to many of us "geeks", is really too much. A 6 yr. old simply does not have the strength to kill an older and substantially larger kid, no matter how well he uses the law of gravity. I grew up with three older "ender's". One (the third, btw) is absolutely a genius. He was always miles ahead of his classes, was brilliant at absolutely everything he did and had the ego to match (and like Bean, he had the test scores to prove it <g> ). He was a lot like Ender in many ways, but Card exaggerated it to such a degree, that I think he lost credibility.

I think the message that kids are more flexible and creative than adults is valid and I appreciated how Card used this to his advantage.

4) I really like Hobbit's reply to this one!

5) This novel is absolutely geared towards young men. The portrayal of women is pitiful at best. The message that women are simply not capable of battle was loud and abundantly clear. Who was the first to crack during the final battle? Petra. She was also one of the very few women to make it to Battle School. Valentine was rejected because she was too sensitive and kind.

I am now reading Shadow of the Hegemon which has several more lead female characters. It is becoming clear to me that Card has a certain view of women's strengths and weaknesses that is more or less stereotypical. This is not so much a criticism as an observation. I have seen far worse portrayals of women.

8) Ender's Game is a superbly written novel. Even for the second time reading it, I still found it to be a real page-turner. I love the way that Card was able to touch upon beliefs and attitudes without becoming too preachy or holier-than-thou. Though, in The Shadow of the Hegemon, this ability degenerates. But, to classify it as one of the "greats" is just too much for me. It is a fine story and a good read. Card has a wonderful way with words, much like Connie Willis. I just can't put Ender's Game in league with authors like Asimov, Pohl, Clarke, or Le Guin.

Despite the above, I really did enjoy the story, even for a second time. I agree with Hobbit that Card is really good at characterization. You really do get to know his people and can feel for them. Like Heinlein, Card is a wonderful story teller. But, I think he overdoes it. Peter is too evil and Valentine is too good and Ender is too much in the middle. <g> His characters almost become charicatures.

Ok...rambled enough. I'm sure I will have much more to say as the discussion develops.

Thanks again to Vortex for starting this. I am really looking forward to reading and discussing new and different books.

[fortytwo]

This was the first Card book I read many years ago.I couldn't put it down.Looking back now though having read most of his fiction I feel it was not what I consider typical Card.

(1)Because I feel children mature more quickly now,are more adaptable and open to ideas more readily combined with the quick reactions of the young I found it easy to believe Card's portrayal of a system that would use them in this way.However I don't think the emotional difficulties was explored enough.

(8)I am a huge fan of Card and he ranks among my dozen best science fiction authors (not his fantasy though).I particularly like the skill he brings to his character's conversations.He makes an ordinary conversation so interesting.Although he has a slight tendency to preach as others have noted.

(9)I found Enders Game so enjoyable that I had no trouble accepting it as a stand alone novel (actually when I read it I didn't know it was the first of a series)When I read Speaker For The Dead,Xenocide and Children Of The Mind I noticed a completely different style which increased my enjoyment of his work.I can understand,however that not everyone would go for that change.I'm not sure how popular the rest of the series was.

(10)I too, found my highlight to be the realisation that Ender was involved in a real battle and not just playing games.It came as a complete surprise to me!

[Alai]

What can I say? This was the book that showed me the path to sci-fi reading. Maybe a bit boring to read but this is how it went: It all started when I watched Star Wars: TPM. I came to think about the guy that played Anakin, has he done any other movies? So I looked for somebody with Jake Lloyd on their ICQ interests list and found one person. This guy said he was going to be in the movie ENder's Game and I of course wondered what it was. He told me it was a great book and that I should read it and so I did. I was caught after only the first chapter, this book was something extra...

I can't point out what this little extra is but it's sure there. The book "tells" the reader that little kids really have minds of their own. I didn't think of that until I read this book and then remembered what I thought like when I was six. And to my surprise I found that I haven't changed that much at all! Except for the message the book was a great world of imaginations to enter when you opened the book. I can't say I've read much sci-fi though, just EG and the sequel to the end. I'm now reading Xenocide.
Now to the questions:

1, Not at all. If a child is pushed like those kids they will mature early and probably behave like that (I'm not a psychiatrist though).

2, That's pretty obvious. He has never had a real friend before and Alai is always there to kind of comfort him in the rough battle school.

3, I must agree with Vitriol. He doesn't like to be like that to Bean but he has to in order to make his Army succesfull. The part where he let's Bean sleep in his room is a way for Ender to let Bean know he does it just for that reason. By the way, I didn't really get that part fully. Did they sleep in the same bed or not?

4, At least I can't think of any for the moment.

5, No, it does not. I think Card has an easier time writing of how young boys feel since he was one himself. I can't explain it but I think it's more fun reading it as it is (maybe because I'm a guy myself?).

6, This is one of the few lacking things in EG. Peter isn't very believable, at least not part of him.

7, A to quick ending and the thing about Peter.

8, As I said before I haven't read much SF. But I think it would be at the top.

9, Absolutely not, EG is a strong novel that can be read all alone. SFTD is also a great book that can be read alone (I finished it today)

10, The relationships betwen Alai and Ender and Bean and Ender. My favourite part is the one where Alai and Ender finds the note of Ender's first transfer.

I hope I haven't bored you. Saalam.

"They have a word for us Peter. They call us children and they treat us like mice."

[This message has been edited by Alai (edited March 15, 2002).]

[Alai]

Now that a few pwople has posted their wiews on the book it's time for the real discussion to start. It's time to start critisize and think about other peoples reflexions.

[takezosan]

Ok, here are my thoughts on the proffered inquiries.

1. I read the foreward, and have to agree that their behavior is a trifle more mature than what I'm accustomed to seeing in children that age. However, being as they were specially chosen and augmented by this vague monitor device, I figured normal patterns didn't apply.

5. hmm... I didn't see it as particularly cheauvanisitic, since Petra played an integral role in the action, instead of being the hostage/negotiator that Valentine was. I did find it odd that she was the first to break under the pressure, but that was played off as though Ender were relying on her abilities that much more.

6. Peter seemed very much the yang to Ender's yin, but he developed his own personality after a while, though at the cost of Val's integrity.

7. I'm not one big into these kind of dramatic sci-fi's, but this kept my interest. I found the battle scenes a little hard to follow, occasionally, and the angst got a little heavy at times, but overall a decent read.


just my view on it, anyway...

[Kamakhya]

Hey Vortex...just 'cause you started this, doesn't mean you are exempt from opinion! We've had a good number of ideas and opinons expressed so far, what do you think about the book?

[vortexreader]

I've been deliberately keeping my distance because I wanted to see what kind of initial response there would be and what sort of content would be in those responses.

I think the enjoyment a reader gets out of Ender's Game depends on two things:

1) How old you are when you first read it, and
2) How much other SF you have read previously.

Older readers, I feel, are less likely to be enamoured of the storyline as, perhaps, younger readers are. I first read Ender's Game when I was in my late 20's (not that long ago) and I'd already had a good 10-15 years of SF reading under my belt at that point. I think this made me less susceptible to Card's obvious 'manipulations' such as placing likable children in terrible, dangerous situations...an obvious attempt at pulling heart strings if ever there was one. I suspect younger readers, especially younger male readers, are much more likely to empathise with Ender. Adults, apart from being naturally more cynical, are more likely to recognise that children simply don't 'think' like that (despite Card's protestations to the contrary).

It strikes me as strange that few commentators on Ender's Game, whether they are professional critics or fans, mention the exploitation of the children in the Battle School. It's a contentious aspect of the story that most people gloss over but one that I find appalling!

While I don't dislike the novel, I don't think Ender's Game is deserving of all the praise that it has received...mostly because I feel that some of that praise has come from uncritical reading. It's all well and good to like a story but I think it's also important to delve a little deeper. For example, if Ender's Game is correctly described as Science Fiction, where's the Science?

Of the initial discussion points that I listed no-one has really responded to number (7) What is your major criticism of the novel? Surely someone else must have found some fault with it!

One real positive for me out of the experience of re-reading Ender's Game has been that it has renewed my interest in re-reading Speaker For The Dead...which I remember as being an infinitely better book...something which should please fellow poster Alai!

I'll post more as the discussion develops.

[Alai]

Why should it please me Vortexreader? SFTD is indeed a very good book. I wouldn't say better though. It very much depends on who reads it as you said earlier. Like young boys and teenagers finds EG extremely good maybe SFTD is more appealing to a bit more matured readers. I'm 15 and I liked both of the books very much. Ender's Game just slightly more.

[Alucard]

1). IMO, yes, they are definitely unrealistic, regardless of their super-genius status...but it doesn't hurt the story. In fact, had the children all acted their ages, it wouldn't have been nearly as entertaining.

6). Again, no, Peter is not entirely believable. I'd say Peter is an exaggeration, but, since Ender himself is also an exageration, I thought he balanced things well (and after all, this is just a story, so I have absolutely no problem with Author's exaggerating as long as it fits the story -- and in this case, it does).

7). There was really very little to gripe about in this book. It was well written, well paced, creative, and the plot twist was very effective. But it wasn't perfect. I thought the chapter pertaining to the two childrens political personas via the web was too drawn out. I understand the importance of it, but a lot of what Card went into could have been summarized and had the same effect. This was the only point in the story that I thought dragged. Also, I thought the book could have used one or two more "optomistic" moments, because, at times, it felt somewhat oppresive (which I understand is the feeling Card was trying to achieve, but every once in a while a little break is nice). But these gripes are very minor. Enders game is one of my favorite sci-fi novels.

8). Card is definitely up there.

10). Without a doubt, the plot-twist toward the end was the most definitive moment (with the game not really being a game). It forced you to rethink all of the characters and events that had happened up until then, and is what made the novel such an outstanding one.

[This message has been edited by Alucard (edited March 17, 2002).]

[vortexreader]

I think the novel would have been just as effective if the main protagonists had have been adults. I'm not sure what using children achieves...other than adding an extra emotive layer to the reaction of the reader.

[Vitriol]

I think that the use of children is important; while Ender may have all sorts of abilities he can do nothing against the system; all the games he plays count for nothing.