posted
It's definitly Mamie from Lovelock. I think I have screamed at the book for her.
Of course one could argue that she doesn't count since Lovelock was a joint project (in which case I would argue that this so called "one" didn't exist ) in that case I don't really know. I'll have to think about it.
posted
Novinha. She ruined the last books in the Ender Series for me. I wanted her to die slowly and painfully, and then be resurrected so that she could die that way again.
I often wonder - was Novinha suppose to be that obnoxious? Did OSC write her so that you could see into the depths of Ender's patience? Or, am I not suppose to find her as pathetic and weak and whiney as I do?
Posts: 7600 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
By far Alvin, people disagree with me, but I find him far too well rounded to be realalistic, i thoiuhgt he ruined the potential for a great series. But o well, a lot of others liked him, so I must of missed something.
Posts: 103 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd have to say Elemak. The guy was so greedy and had such a lust for power that he divided the human colonists and almost completely screwed up the Oversoul's plan simply because of his jealousy.
Posts: 332 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Novinha represents the sinful, hateful, horrid masses of people.
Ender represents God's love and patience with the above.
Hmmmm . . . .
I didn't like Novinha, much, either. However, she is a classic example of where fear not dealt with can take one - how it can warp a person -
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Novinha. She ruined the last books in the Ender Series for me. I wanted her to die slowly and painfully, and then be resurrected so that she could die that way again.
While I don't agree with that statment--even thought it's very funny--I agree with the sentiment behind it. I dislike Novinha a lot also.
But, I think Elemak also ties Novinha for my most disliked character.
I have two more in the Homecoming series I dislike. Kokor and Sevet disgust me as well. I guess they were supposed to right? Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
kokor and sevet have to be the most annoying, arrogant, and conceded characters of all time. but elemak is worse
Posts: 10 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Did anyone else find Quara very annoying in Children of the Mind?
I just reread it, and the passage where Jane-Valentine is trying to be nice to her, and asks what built up so much resentment. Quara replies with a made-up story about how Quim molested her as a child.
Maybe it's just that that bothers me, but it showed me how little she cared about anyone, even the memory of her dead brother.
I always liked how Orson Scott Card can make a death seem horrible in one book (Pipo and Libo's) and then mild in the next. What happened to Quim was not nearly so graphic or nasty as being flayed, but it was somehow much worse.
Posts: 27 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I interpreted that passage as a jab at the on-going psychobabble that excuses all personal failings on the grounds of some traumatic happening or the other, usuallu occurring in childhood - as I recall, Quara made some sort of pointed comment about that as well -
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's funny that so many of you reacted so negatively to Novinha. I thought she was a beautiful character, and I came to love her by the end of the book, despite her flaws.
Actually, that was one of the most powerful things I got from Speaker for the Dead and is one of the things that make it one of my favorite books of all time: that I found myself able to love Novinha. I realized that if I could love her, I could (and should) find it in myself to forgive, respect, and even love everyone.
My least favorite character would have to be Mamie. She drove me nuts and will prevent me from reading the sequels to Lovelock.
posted
She drove me nuts, but it was like playing a video game for me, a really good way to express my anger. I can't believe how long I've been waiting for the sequals to come!
posted
I've got to stump for Quara also, by far the most enfuriating personality in any of Cards books. Novinha didn't particularly bother me at all, OSC provided such an intimate understanding of her it was easy to relate to where she was coming from. Elemak didn't bother me terribly either, sure he was a bad guy and all but again I can relate better to him than to Quaras character.
Posts: 56 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I interpreted that passage as a jab at the on-going psychobabble that excuses all personal failings on the grounds of some traumatic happening or the other, usuallu occurring in childhood - as I recall, Quara made some sort of pointed comment about that as well -
Maybe it was, but she insulted a brother that was not only practically a saint, but also sacrificed himself for the whole colony. Even if it is as you say, she has no respect for anyone.
Posts: 27 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, I'm not saying Sevet, Kokor, Elemak, and Novinha are badly written by any means. OSC really knows how to write a detestable charater. He knows how to write a likeable one too. I'm just saying I can't stand the personalities of the characters. I'm not saying OSC wrote them poorly.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to agree with Goeke and go with Quara but as an adult, she was funny as a child. And Goeke it was Wung-Mu not Jane-Val. that she told that story to.
Posts: 397 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I hate to point out that there couldn't have been a Quara without Grego. Quara never actually got people murdered, though she believed she was conspiring with the descolada. Sure Grego helped develop the outside inside travel. But didn't Quara have data on the descolada that was critical to recoding it so that inside outside travel didn't constitute another xenocide?
I have to say that I'm most repulsed by Cavil Planter and Reverend Thrower. They are really pretty much varelse in my estimation. (that's a dangerous, incomprehensible alien, right?)
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, that's varelse. I have to disagree with about these particular characters being varelse though. Cavil Planter was not a good man, but I don’t think he was incomprehensible, just weak. He was tempted by his slave women (not because they tried to, but because of his lust) and being weak, succumbed to it. I think that all this says about him is what’ve I’ve already said, not a good man, a weak man.
Thrower I actually thought was not that bad a guy until he started the Property Right Crusade. I’m not sure what that makes him, so maybe that’s why you think he’s varelse, but it seems that before that he was a decent man.
This is something that’s always bugged me, because Thrower’s first experience with the Unmaker is when he realizes that almost all of America is going to be heathen if no one does anything about it. Apparently this thought opens up his mind to the Unmaker, but I never got that. It seems like while I wouldn’t have done the same thing, he really wanted to save the people of America. He gave up his future and moved to America to start a Church in the middle of the wilderness educating the local people. Doesn’t seem that evil to me.
posted
SPOILERS re: Alvin Maker series. I think one of the most important moral dilemnas of the Maker series is what to make of the otherworldly visitations that turn Thrower and Planter on to their diabolical paths. I used to worry about this more.
When the visitor first appears to Thrower, he quotes something about good men losing hope and that is all. That was the state Thrower had been in, dispairing over the godlessness of the new world (Pride). Thrower fails to apply the quote to his own situation, but is just bowled over by the mysterious visit. The Visitor tells Thrower very few lies, he just elicits Thrower's own prejudices and shapes them into the most destructive conclusions possible.
Cavil's overseer is the same deal. He just tells him to follow his heart (like a Disney movie) and it just happens that his heart is very bad. I believe Cavil's actions reveal that he is not just a lustful man, but actually evil. I mean, how bad do you have to be to get shunned out of the community of other slaveholders?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: Novinha. She ruined the last books in the Ender Series for me. I wanted her to die slowly and painfully, and then be resurrected so that she could die that way again.
Ralphie, you said it perfectly! Except for maybe the resurrection part; once she's dead let her stay that way!
quote: OSC really knows how to write a detestable charater.
posted
Qing Jao, definately, she kept me from rereading the last two books for a couple of years, cause I couldn't stand reading about her again.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
i dunno, achilles gets to a point where he is sickenly arrogant.
but then again, nuns kinda scare me, even though carlotta was hilariously cynical.
but ill have to say either achilles, novinha, or peter. not the EG peter, or New Peter. Its gotta be the Shadow of the Hegemon/Puppets Peter. such an arrogant little so and so...
or Mick... gotta hate Mick. Mick, Bonzo, and Bernard.
Posts: 45 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ender? why? He's too patient? He's too famous? I'd like to hear your reasons. Not that i like him more than any one other char, peter's my hero.
I'd say i hated Quara and Quin-jao the most because they knew better than to feal the way they did. Particularly Quara who was so obviously wrong and who obviously knew it she was just being a pain to be contrary and to get attention, That drives me up the wall. Novinha didn't bother me after SFTD, i think i just got used to her or because i met someone IRL who is exactly like her.
I dislike Bean too, for many reasons, he whines a LOT and he's sort of a coward, not entirely but enough to bug me.
~Brock ~Around the survivors, a perimeter create.
Posts: 46 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seriously disliked Cavil Planter, for the obvious reasons. Also , Kokor and Sevet. But the one I hated the Most Was Mebbekew, Elemak's puppet without a will of his own.
Posts: 55 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to agree with Sevet and Kokor being reprehensible. It completely pissed me off when they got to leave with all of the "righteous" people. Give me a break! They showed absolutely no true change of heart, and should have stayed with Elemak and his evil cadre. (IMHO)
Okay, after thinking about this, my response was not logical. As the only adult women with the Elemak group, their lives would have been an abusive hell had they stayed. Their brother had to take them with him to protect them, whether they had had a change of heart or not
Surprisingly, I don't hate Elemak. He never pretended to be anything other than what he was.
[ June 11, 2003, 11:16 AM: Message edited by: Sweet William ]
Posts: 524 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
I disliked many aspects of Mamie, but she reminded me too much of some other ladies I've known growing up. Most of the time, I felt sad for her more than anything else. (But, and my whole post is leading up to this point...I might agree with Hobbes here, I just need more material to base my opinion on. And, to get this material, I'd need a second book in the series to more fully discuss Mamie's character...you know, maybe wrapped in with a story about a psychotic cat trying to kill a capuchin... )
Posts: 148 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
He could not successfully wipe out the Buggers (Formics). In not killing them perfectly, their lives were lost in vain, therefore, making him evil. He became no more than a common murderer. Had he killed them perfectly (not one Bugger left) he would have made something beautiful. Something eternal (a very difficult feat). Instead, he brought a queen to life and began the rebuilding of the Buggers. Though such an action could be wonderful in the case of human civilization, the Buggers had reached their evolutionary peak and could go no further. For that reason, killing them only retarded their progress. At best. If you want a hero, look to Abner Doon/Jason Worthing (each represents 1/2 of the perfect hero). This brings up a very important fact that I tried to discuss in my thread "What is a Locke" (not to "toot my own horn"). A hero is naught without a monster. Both are, in the big picture, one and the same. Every saving act is a manifestation of this duality. On a philosophical side note, dualities spring up like weeds everywhere (taoism, the nature of light, matter/anti-matter).
posted
That's a pretty foolish way to define evil because he failed annihilating an opponent, i hardly think that makes him evil. It sounds like your're making the same argument that the student in the beginning of speaker says that the act itself is evil regardless of intent?
Then i guess we're all evil and failures because i've come up against many opponents in one pursuit or another but since my body count is 0, I guess i failed totally and crossed from the ways of good to the ways of evil....
It's a sad state of affairs when any type of total devastation can be classified as beautiful, just because a creation is extinct.
I'm not taoist. the man who pushes a child out of the way of a building knocked over in an accident, I'm guessing his Yang was the earthquake right? no i can do better it was the people inside the building cuz if they hadn't made the building it wouldn't have fallen. In my opinion that man is a hero for saving someone else and dying in the process, but his family wasn't totally obliterated so i spose the earthquake was an evil failure right?
posted
I read it right the first time, i think you misunderstood me, i was being very fecetious.
If he saved the human race killing the majority of the buggers wasn't in vain, he incapacitated his opponent, that's winning in war, and as i see it, if the war's over it wasn't in vain because now i can go back to my sheep-herding. somehow i dont think that i've really stated anything different from my last post so i'll ask a different way:
So if hitler had killed all the jews he wouldn't have been evil? I'm not seeing how your judgement works.
~Brock ~By the Matrix!
Posts: 46 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:A hero is naught without a monster. Both are, in the big picture, one and the same. Every saving act is a manifestation of this duality. On a philosophical side note, dualities spring up like weeds everywhere (taoism, the nature of light, matter/anti-matter).
I get the impression that your saying that for every good or positive thing done, there is an evil, negative thing done. There are a few problems with this, number one is that this certainly isn't universal. Entropy, for example always increases. So it isn't perfectly balanced. Also, if we see a perfect duality between good and evil that would mean two things. The first is that there is an absolute moral code (otherwise good and evil would be meaningless terms). The second is an offshoot of the first: humans are unique to normal physical matter. If we are only atoms that react exactly as the laws of physics make them then there is no actuall action taken be humans. In fact there is no reaction to our enviroment either. We would become identical to our enviroment, there would be no meaningful difference bettween say the stone to our left and us.
If this is true and what you say is true that would mean that the laws of physics and the initial state of matter in the universe would be so perfectly set up that each atom's (or even string's) interaction would cause perfect balance on a moral level that would be approximitly 10^40 times their scale. That seems pretty far fetched to me.
I kind of went off on a tangent but the point is that we A) must have souls/spirits/whatever and B)must be able to react at least semi-independent of the enviroment around us. This does not dis-prove your theory, but think, if that were true then whoever created the universe (souls don't necesitate a God but I find it most unlikely that if there are souls there is no God) created it in such a way that their is absolute morals and also so that it's impossible for the human race to progress in following them. Not an impossible scenario but one I think is rather...impractical.
The first problem is that I wasn't suggesting that for every good act there is an evil to balance it. I was writing of leaders. For every savior there must be a monster, not merely to keep order, but more to make the savior and monster seem more so in relative terms. It becomes very difficult for people to agknowledge great leaders when not at war with something or someone. It takes conflict for people to recognize greatness. It is also for this reason that a meritocracy is so strong (I'd mention fascism but I'm sure I would get swiftly rebuked). On the point of the Phenomena of Man, what separtes you or I from the particle world is consciousness (synonymous with soul/mind). As thinking humans, we have great power of the universe through thought, without being aware of it. It is well known that the "observer" can change the results of an experiment entirely. On your point of entropy, I'd argue that the universe moves in a continuity towards a more ordered state (you're thinking thermodynamics). We have to forget our highschool chemistry class and realize the truth in quantum mechanics and other frontier physics. On both the sub-sub-atomic (quarks) and the sub-atomic level, we (science) finds that the univers does indeed more towards a more ordered state. We now know this (but we're still not sure why it doesn't translate that in the macroscopic). On a personal note, I like the way you think.
--Locke
p.s. Brock-
Would Hitler have been evil had he killed the jews and won the war?
(sorry about answering a question with another. I can't help it, I'm Irish)
Posts: 56 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:On a personal note, I like the way you think.
<grin> Don't feed this ego. *blushes*
quote:On both the sub-sub-atomic (quarks) and the sub-atomic level, we (science) finds that the univers does indeed more towards a more ordered state
I've never seen anything that supports. All that I've heard (from very reliable sources and plenty of them) is that the one way to tell wich direction the universe is going (in time) is by increase in entropy. Every reaction yeilds a increase in entropy. True this is only thermodynamics, but basically what it means is that the end result of on an infinite number of reactions is that all matter will become energy, which is fundemently unorganizied. Though I want to hear more about what your talking about here...
quote:For every savior there must be a monster, not merely to keep order, but more to make the savior and monster seem more so in relative terms. It becomes very difficult for people to agknowledge great leaders when not at war with something or someone. It takes conflict for people to recognize greatness.
quote:Would Hitler have been evil had he killed the jews and won the war?
I think these both adress the same point, is their absolute morals? I agree fully with you that people tend not to recognize greatness when it isn't surronded by something lesser. We always look to quantify differences, not absolutes. However, that doesn't mean that these absolutes don't exist, just that we have trouble seing them. For instance, if Hitler won the war and ended up writting the history books most people (at least under this hypothetical German control) would probably think he was something akin to The Savoir. However, if there are absolute morals, Hitler would be evil (not completlly, I don't think we've ever had a perfectly evil person born here) despite what he says about himself.
Well I think that if there is no spirirt/soul than we aren't seperated from the particle world. We are simply self-propegating physical phenomenon. Our conciousness is really just an effect of very carefully set up atoms that are a result of normal physical phenomenan. Conciousness losses meaning because the fact that we can percieve the world is no longer true. There is simply a system of atoms that make up our brain in a specific pattern.
posted
re Novinha and Qing-Jao: These were two of the most resonant characters in the Ender books for me. I knew they were wrong, but I understood why they acted as they did, and their lives were so sad - so pointlessly sad, could they only see it - I couldn't possibly hate them. Deep, abiding compassion doesn't allow that. More so Qing-Jao, I think, than Novinha - I did see the annoying/abrasive side of Novinha, but Qing-Jao was joy and pain at once to read. An unshakable, pure, mistaken faith is one of the saddest things in the world, to me.
Posts: 2762 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
lissande what bout Quara what did you think of her?
Hitler would still be evil if he had killed the jews and won the war. What i was trying to figure out is how you judge good and evil, I dont understand how total destruction would make life lost not vain and not evil, ender killed an alien race he believed was trying to kill him, how can any action in self-defence be evil?
I can agree that it often takes a monster to bring a hero, but you dont hafto praise the monster, he's not the hero, the hero is worthy of praise independant of the monster, because he would've acted the same way regardless of what monster he was fighting, that's what makes him a hero.
Why because Ender's opponenets survived is he evil?
You still havn't answere this question.
~Brock ~He who lives by the Sword gets shot by us Archers
Posts: 46 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Brock... One important point, Ender did not know that he was killing the Formics. For all he knew he was playing a video game. Would he have done it if he knew? My guess is not, after all that's one of the underlining plots of the series.
Hitler had a set plan to destroy anyone who was not Arian. Most likely Hitler did not have a problem with most races, he just new who he could rile to be on his side.
The character I find most vile is Abraham. Even thou he was a huge influence on todays religions he was one of the most short sighted people of the time. After reading OSC's depictions of the stories of Genesis and the Bible I'm convinced that Abraham is a major player in the reason that many great religions are split.
Look back at any Jewish, Islamic, and Christian religion and you will find that the roots are the same. How many Christians out there are aware that Islam recognizes Jesus Christ as a Prophet. Does the Christian religion give the same respect to Mohamed? (Don't take me wrong and assume I support terrorism though. There is no more pathetic form of expressing your opinion.) The big body of water between us has made a huge gap in our knowledge, lets fix that and learn. Heck, we have the technology don't we?
I've only been on this site for a few days and am impressed by the posts I've seen. Thank you for your intellectual insights, everyone! I hope the fact that I'm so blunt doesn't offend anyone.
[ June 13, 2003, 03:53 AM: Message edited by: Josh W ]
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Quara? She was my favorite of Novinha's children (except Olhado, I think). She was abrasive and had no respect for blah blah, like everyone's already said, but I thought she had a point, however wrong-headedly she went about expressing it.
I'm not sure if I have a least favorite character. I don't like the way Abraham, Isaac, Rebekah, et al. are whitewashed in the Women of Genesis books. I see no reason to justify their mistakes by adding an extraneous (extrabiblical, at the very least) 'God told me to - no, really' when it is their very sin that makes their histories more powerful. But that's more saying I didn't like the characterization of those individuals, which isn't precisely the question.
OK, can't think of a character I hate - I keep thinking of ones people might suggest as their least favorite and thinking, But I like that one. But how about Alvin? That guy seriously needs to knock it off. Gets under my skin. Posts: 2762 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Josh- I think most people know that Muslims consider Jesus a prophet, Christians consider Him to be the Son of God. You might not see the difference there, to Christians at least (I can't speak for Muslims) it's a huge one. Many differences that you consider to be minor between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are major differences to us, and integral to our faith.
NOTE: I know I'm not speaking for all Christians here. I think, in this post at least, I'm speaking for a great many of them.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
Ever notice how Christianity is Judaism + a savior and Islam is Christianity + another? (I know its much more complex. Just trying to get the gears going.)
If you want to think of it that way, I guess. A lot of people do, but a lot of people don't, too. It's just what you choose to believe.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have you red Hyperion? Any agent of the TechnoCore fits the description. Particularly Councilor Albedo. The only possible Xception mentioned would be Ummon An AI that fought against the destruction of mankind.
I dont want to xplain the background it's pages long so i'll move on. The aides in China in the end of Shadow Puppets. They were men who were only out to further themselves. They are villains
Furthering yourself is fine, as long as you pay your own prices, I think, i'm not going to back this one up, that a man who's whole life is his career and himself, who has a family because its 'the thing to do' and who neglects them is a villain.
My definition is really simple i guess.
My heroes, like Peter, are working for the greater good, Peter works for world peace. Achilles works for world slavery, maybe it's peace in his definition but if everyone's dead or subdued i dont see it as peace, but as emptyness. Nothing, there's no peace in that only silence which is unnatural.
Peter was selfish for a long time. Alai was my hero then he still is my second choice. Alai is the caliph and leads all the muslims, probably he's the most powerful man in the world, but he was chosen and didn't wish to be there, When he was there however he didn't back down from his responsibilites.
Arthas from Warcraft III would qualify as a villain. While he was on the side of good he sacrificed everything for vengeance Which is a selfish pursuit, he claimed he wanted to defend his homeland but when he pursued Mal'Ganis away from his homeland After Mal'Ganis was in retreat it was personal. Palpatine was a villain, he wanted to rule by conquest and killed millions to atempt it.
Josh W
Ender was defending his home on earth when he annihilateed the buggers, i think he would've done it whether it was a game or not. It would've been harder for him, noone in a right state of mind wants to kill but he would've done it if he thought the buggers would kill him. Everything, person, or animal, fights to defend itself, it's family and it's territory.
~Brock ~three mothers you dont mess with, Mother Nature, Mothers-In-law, and Mother Freaken Ukranians!
Posts: 46 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
I understand and respect that Christians believe Jesus to be The Son of God. I was raised Catholic and went to 8 years of Catholic school. The further I educate myself on other religions, both within and outside of Christianity, my opinions are changing and I now have a largely different set of beliefs. I don't think any religion is incorrect. Do I believe that Jesus is the Son of God? I certainly do. I also believe that we are all children of God. I recognize that Jesus was a great man and did incredible things for humanity. Was he a prophet or a messenger. I don't think we have ever really given him a proper name.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
While I don't agree with that statment--even thought it's very funny--I agree with the sentiment behind it. I dislike Novinha a lot also. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
