I've got some energy this morning, so I suppose I should weigh in on this one, being, as I am, a long-time aficionado of speculative fiction and a recognized authority (in some quarters) on the oeuvre.
Basic story: Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game, which has been a very popular science-fiction novel, as is the way of such things is slated to become a block-buster movie. It seems, however, that Card himself has a very public record as a vicious homophobe,* serves on the board of NOM, has condemned marriage equality, and is poised to make pots of money from this. Needless to say, the natives are getting restless, and a group calling itself Geeks Out is organizing a boycott of the film.
His response? A plea for tolerance. Rachel Edidin has a good come-back on that one at Wired:
Edidin is not the only one responding. Science-fiction writer Dave Gerrold (who is gay, and who, in my estimation, is a better writer than Card, not nearly so given to self-indulgent preachiness) also had words for Card's attempt to duck out from under:
So in addition to being a bigot (although now he's soft-pedaling -- or do I mean "back-pedaling"? -- as much as possible on his previous statements with the excuse that "those were the conditions at the time." There's something in there about reeds and wind, I think. What Card is doing by playing the victim card is displaying in high relief the lack of moral foundation -- not to mention strength of character -- that seems to be endemic on the anti-gay right. Basically, he's a coward.
What's my own take? Aside from the "morality" of boycotts (and I can't believe the number of comments and posts I've run across about whether a boycott of the film is justifiable, or a violation of Card's rights. WTF?), there's the quality of the product. I remember Ender's Game as being one of those books that's just great when you're a teenager, and that looks kind of shopworn and shallow when you come back to it. The series degenerated badly -- Speaker For the Dead was barely readable, and displayed in full colors all of Card's weaknesses as a writer -- over-written, self-indulgent, preachy, wordy, and pointless. Same thing happened with the Alvin Maker series. He's written some very good books, but he doesn't seem to be able to sustain a level of quality. I never considered him more than second-rank at his best.
Will I see the movie? Probably not. I don't remember the story as being that compelling, I don't need to put money in Card's pocket, and besides, Thor 2 is coming out about the same time.
* I was going to include some sample quotes, but they're scattered all over the place. If you follow the links in this post, you'll find enough to give you the picture.
Basic story: Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game, which has been a very popular science-fiction novel, as is the way of such things is slated to become a block-buster movie. It seems, however, that Card himself has a very public record as a vicious homophobe,* serves on the board of NOM, has condemned marriage equality, and is poised to make pots of money from this. Needless to say, the natives are getting restless, and a group calling itself Geeks Out is organizing a boycott of the film.
His response? A plea for tolerance. Rachel Edidin has a good come-back on that one at Wired:
In a recent statement to Entertainment Weekly, Orson Scott Card responded to a proposed boycott of the upcoming film adaptation of his novel Ender’s Game by informing the movie-going public that it doesn’t really matter that he’s been working ceaselessly for the last decade to make sure gay people don’t get basic human rights, or that he advocated the violent overthrow of the government should same-sex marriage become legal, or that he’s used his position as a popular author as a platform from which to spew increasingly aggressive anti-equality rhetoric like his comment in a 2004 essay that gays “cannot be permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that society.”
“The gay marriage issue is moot,” Card reassured readers in his statement to EW, apparently under the impression that the recent Supreme Court decisions regarding the Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8 were sufficient to erase the history of legislated bigotry he worked tirelessly to promote and preserve in his fight against equal rights.
Really, Card could have stopped there. Instead, he went on to wonder “whether the victorious proponents of gay marriage will show tolerance toward those who disagreed with them when the issue was still in dispute.” His concern, ostensibly, is that someone might be petty enough not to see his movie simply because he spent years lobbying for laws that treated certain people as less than human. The fallacy he employs here — that calling out hate-speech is intolerance on par with curtailing the human rights of others — is a favorite fallback of cowards and bullies, and a way of evading responsibility for the impact of their words and actions.
Edidin is not the only one responding. Science-fiction writer Dave Gerrold (who is gay, and who, in my estimation, is a better writer than Card, not nearly so given to self-indulgent preachiness) also had words for Card's attempt to duck out from under:
After twenty years of despicably virulent homophobia ... no. This is just another detestable characterization of LGBT people -- that we are intolerant.
Intolerant? Of people who want to lock us up, put us in concentration camps, deny us our civil rights? Intolerant? Are you fucking kidding me?
You want me to be tolerant, Scott? First be one of those people who understands. Or to put it bluntly -- get your fucking foot off my neck, then we'll talk tolerance.
So in addition to being a bigot (although now he's soft-pedaling -- or do I mean "back-pedaling"? -- as much as possible on his previous statements with the excuse that "those were the conditions at the time." There's something in there about reeds and wind, I think. What Card is doing by playing the victim card is displaying in high relief the lack of moral foundation -- not to mention strength of character -- that seems to be endemic on the anti-gay right. Basically, he's a coward.
What's my own take? Aside from the "morality" of boycotts (and I can't believe the number of comments and posts I've run across about whether a boycott of the film is justifiable, or a violation of Card's rights. WTF?), there's the quality of the product. I remember Ender's Game as being one of those books that's just great when you're a teenager, and that looks kind of shopworn and shallow when you come back to it. The series degenerated badly -- Speaker For the Dead was barely readable, and displayed in full colors all of Card's weaknesses as a writer -- over-written, self-indulgent, preachy, wordy, and pointless. Same thing happened with the Alvin Maker series. He's written some very good books, but he doesn't seem to be able to sustain a level of quality. I never considered him more than second-rank at his best.
Will I see the movie? Probably not. I don't remember the story as being that compelling, I don't need to put money in Card's pocket, and besides, Thor 2 is coming out about the same time.
* I was going to include some sample quotes, but they're scattered all over the place. If you follow the links in this post, you'll find enough to give you the picture.
No comments:
Post a Comment