posted
I have been an OSC fan since the 80's, when my sister (a librarian) was fortunate enough to meet Mr. Card and to get him to sign a copy of Ender's Game, which she then sent to me. I loved it and went on to read everything of his that I could find, although I did bog down somewhere in the Memories of Earth.
Anyway, I read Saints for the first time probably 11 or 12 years ago, and enjoyed it, although I am not LDS. At the time, my husband and I had no children. Since then, we've had three. Recently I decided to re-read Saints, remembering how much I had liked it the first time through. All was well until I got to the part where Dinah abandoned her children in England, knowing that it would be forever. That did it--I lost all sympathy for her character. I tried about three times to continue reading the book and I just could not. Saints went into the give-away pile. I wonder if anyone else has had changes in their own lives affect their responses to a book, whether by OSC or another author?
Posts: 3 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would have to say that Robert Heinlein's "Stranger in a Strange Land," was the most difficult read for me. The warped sense of morality under the guise of 'spiritual awakening' was sickening, not to mention the writing style! (or lack therein). I know some people Love Heinlein, but his work always seems to be something of a 1960's LSD trip to me.
I continued reading the book and found myself forced into thought provoking and soul searching philosophies, theologies and general systems of beliefs which were challenged. (I still don't like Heinlein however.)
I would have to agree that "Saints" challenged me as well. As a mother of 5 children, I found this unfathomable when I had been fighting so hard to get my children back!
I liked the book in some areas, other areas made me uncomfortable. As I've changed throughout the years, I have worse things that I've faced than questioning the morality of this mother; (crimes against children; specifically, child pornography and the internet)
I can't give OSC all the credit or Heinlein. It's the fact that I refuse to give in to discomfort. (I think the army did that to me).
Prior to the army, I would have probably thrown it in the dump if it made me uncomfortable. (This is what all GOOD southern women would do if adequately brainwashed. tee hee)
I've actually trashed a work after reading the whole story and it was a waste of time to read. (Frank Kafka's, "Metamorphasis," comes to mind!) Yes, I'm sure there's some societal message in there somewhere, but I just found it as pointless drivel.
I've had a friend who read OSC's, "Lost Boys," and got so enraged that he threw the book on my desk and swore to never read anything by OSC again. Two years later, he realized that Card was one of the best character creationist! (He'd forgotten, in his reading, that his main character didn't exist in reality!) He really was enraged for 2 years over this book. (I'm avoiding giving a spoiler so if you haven't read it, Please DO)
For me, it's usually a child victim that will make me throw a book in the trash more than anything. The rest subjective.
Posts: 163 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are things too uncomfortable to bear. I have no quarrel with someone who cannot bear a book of mine because it taps into some primal feelings. Stories are, after all, intrusions into your memory, and if you don't welcome it, you have no duty to receive it.
Having said that, let me point out that Dinah didn't "abandon" her children. She was forced to choose between her newfound faith and her children - that's what her HUSBAND said. But really the choice was: Stay in England under the complete domination of her husband, unable to have a free hand in raising her children because he would be dictating her every move to her, specifically keeping her from ever associating with Mormons again or teaching her children the religion that she absolutely believed was true; or go to America, knowing that her children would be raised in England EXACTLY the way they would have been raised even if she was there: i.e., without any opportunity to learh or receive anything from their mother's heart.
In other words, could she be a mother even if she stayed? Or would she be only a servant in her husband's house, forced to watch him steal the children away from her day by day, instead of all at once?
I hardly need to say that DOZENS or HUNDREDS of women had to make such choices, and not just over religion. Because the law gave fathers absolute control over children, property, and wives, a woman did not actually get to raise her children just because she did not leave. So the issue was not as clearcut as Dinah's husband wanted everyone to believe.
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
As for child victims - there are lots of child victims in the world. I can understand the desire not to deal with such situations in your fictional reading - you are hardly alone. But I find that it's the response of some children to mistreatment that makes them all the more noble or triumphant when they overcome difficulties.
Character is formed in childhood; all stories involve suffering; stories involving the development of a character in childhood will almost certainly involve suffering, which makes the child a victim.
So I suspect it's a matter of degree, and whether you trust the writer to make it all worthwhile in the end.
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
OSC, "...whether you trust the writer to make it all worthwhile in the end."
Which is exactly why I continued to read "Saints." I've yet to read a book by OSC that wasn't edifying.
FYI: I work against internet/child victimization in so many forms! (pedophiles) I'm choosing to escape from the nastiest form of human (subhuman) behavior in my fictional reading. I was blessed not to be a victim of such, however I've seen enough of them to last a lifetime.
posted
Thanks for the interesting comments. I would like to draw a distinction between a book which makes me feel uncomfortable, and one in which I cannot identify or sympathize with the main character in any way. Ender's Game made me feel quite uncomfortable much of the time, because OSC set up uncompromising moral dilemmas and then did not shy away from the implications of those dilemmas. Yet I loved the book. Other books which have made me feel uncomfortable yet which I have read, enjoyed, and learned from, are the nonfiction stories of Torey Hayden about her work with disturbed children.
The situation with Saints is different. The first time I read it, I did not have any experiences of my own as a mother and so took Dinah's parting from her children at face value. On rereading it, I brought memories of my own to the book. While the only parallel I could possibly draw to Dinah's situation is a very weak one, that of leaving my children for a few hours at a time to go to work, it was apparently enough to make it possible for me to imagine leaving my children forever, or at least to realize that I could never do so. That's when I lost sympathy for Dinah's character to the point where I could not continue in the book no matter how hard I tried. Since I am one of those compulsive readers who will study the list of ingredients on a cereal box if nothing else is at hand, this was a strange and disturbing experience.
OSC's point about the nature of Dinah's dilemma is well taken, although I would argue that while to her she may not have been "abandoning" her children, to them, it certainly felt so. I am sure that if I could imagine any realistic scenario in which I would have to choose between my faith and my children, the book would read very differently. I wonder how Betty Mahmoody, the woman who wrote "Not Without My Daughter" about her escape from Iran, would react to Dinah's situation.
Posts: 3 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, it certainly would (and did) feel like abandonment to them. It was a hard thing for everyone, and a lot of women did NOT make the choice Dinah made. You could make a case that either choice was a noble one - or a dreadful one!
Meanwhile, I have books of mine that I COULD read once, but can't reread now. Lost Boys is almost unbearable to me. So is the story "Killing Children." I wrote KC before I had children; as soon as I did, I knew I could not write such a story any more. I'm not ashamed of it, I just can't bear reading it.
I tell my writing students that the story you write must be one you can care about and believe in. That's because the reader, too, must care about and believe in the story. But if as a reader you run across a moment where you just can't believe - or, if you do believe, can no longer care about the character - well, you really have no CHOICE but to stop reading, because from that point on you'll be a hostile audience, and no story can survive a hostile reading. Nothing wrong with you - and not necessarily anything wrong with the book! Just a fundamental incompatibility.
(Though often it IS something wrong with the book!)
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
<<But if as a reader you run across a moment where you just can't believe - or, if you do believe, can no longer care about the character - well, you really have no CHOICE but to stop reading, because from that point on you'll be a hostile audience, and no story can survive a hostile reading. Nothing wrong with you - and not necessarily anything wrong with the book! Just a fundamental incompatibility.>>
Yes, that's it exactly. And I agree about "Killing Children"--I can't read that one anymore either.
Now to find the rest of the "Shadow" books--I read Ender's Shadow but didn't know there were others until I came to this forum. I don't get out much. Posts: 3 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
He really was enraged for 2 years over this book. (I'm avoiding giving a spoiler so if you haven't read it, Please DO)
