posted
I've recently started with Card, and I've read Songmaster, Worthing Chronicle, Treasure Box (the first 100 pages of which was awful, but it ended OK) and The Homecoming Saga.
To be honest, I've been kind of disappointed. Don't get me wrong, I like the morals that he puts in the story, but it's his character development I don't like. I like the story telling. And what's more, he has the ability to wite well. But here's the crux:
His character development is terrible. I read a book by Terry Brooks detailing the writing life; it's called Sometimes the Magic Works. And he makes an important point: your character is your story. Your characters move with the plot, and vice versa. So if one fails, so goes the other. And here's where Card errs: * The books take periods over long periods of time, so the very characters we're supposed to get attached to, they get old and eventually disappear (in all that I've read but Treasure Box). If creating the universe and setting is more important than the characters in your book, then you're in trouble. I love the worlds he creates, but they take little time to think about. But The characters are what draws us in. Whoever saw a movie that ditched its main characters and never came back? * When I started Homecoming, I was thrilled; the first two books actually had very good character development. Awesome characters development. I loved Luet especially, but Hushidh and Nafai too. But it got frozen after that. The characters never changed. Nafai's 50 years old; why is he trying to please his brother like an awed 14 year old boy?! Why do Kokor and Sevet act like ditses still, when they're past mid-life? And Elakim made sense at first, but his drive to take over became nothing but weird. And poor Luet, when from this non-nonsense person, to a nobody. And the kicker: at the end of book 4, went I was frustrated enough to die, he killed them all off, only to pick up the story 500 years later for the last book. Ah! I have to start the last book of the series with a new group of people? And I don't find out what happens to these ones? * He fails to connect the loop on all the characters in his stories. There were several time in Earthfall and Worthing when I wanted to beat my head against a wall, because a key part of the plot or the characters was left unfinished. In Worthing: What happened with Abner Doon, that made everyone call him the Devil? It's only hinted at. And Jason's mom? Are we really supposed to believe that the "devil" told Jason the truth about her? And the characters in Earthfall never felt finished either. I didn't finish Songmaster, as it got way too gross for me, but I skimmed through the end, and saw the same problems happening. I think the problem stems to the fact that Card fails to plan his novels ahead of time. Terry Brooks always does; he does so inscrutably. I won't claim Terry is perfect, but I really think it's necessary to plan something this complex. Maybe musicians can have inspiration just flow over them, but I don't think authors can.
Hope my comments contribute something. I'm looking forward to see if anyone has any opinions.
Posts: 11 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually I disagree on pretty much all counts. I think character developement is one of OSC's strongets points. (and it's for that reason that I prefer the *first* part of Treasure Box).
Where I am with you is on the Homecoming Saga. I thought the last two books were okay, but not great...though I was more intrigued by the character's actions in the fourth book than by the plot. Maybe this is one of those situations where two people just look for different things when they read.
Or it could be order of reading. I started, like many people do, with Ender's Game, and then I flew through Speaker for the Dead and Xenocide in about a 24 hour period (and this inculdes school, but not sleep ). It is my theory that anyone who doubts Card's ability to create believable, sympathetic, complicated, and conflicted characters has never read the Ender series (Ender's Game, Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide, and Children of the Mind) or the Shadow series (Ender's Shadow, Shadow of the Hegemon, Shadow Puppets, and Shadow of the Giant). I suggest you try 'em out.
And welcome to Hatrack. Posts: 866 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah the character development in the EG series, especially Xenocide, is really its strong point. I don't think the books had any flaws at all when it came to the character development. The reader saw Ender grow and mature through the saga and that was what made the books so special. When OSC introduced new characters, he rarely made them impersonal and because of this the reader could see different angles of the same plot. That was the reason I liked the books so much. While I'm happy that you're reading OSC, I don't think you can judge him until you've read his most celebrated material. Those other books were great but, I think that OSC's best work was from the EG series. If you haven't read those books then you're really missing out.
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it is a more realistic, "epic" form of character development, where they are given real lives, and not treated as all powerful creatures, except when they are, and even then, they have human traits. Have you ever met someone who lived a magnificent story tale life, then disappeared into never never land? no. people grow old, they die, it is simply true, and Mr. Card addresses it as such, atleast in my opinion. He makes the world his character, and facets it with individuals, each of which make it more interesting, more in depth.
You have also never read his true sagas, atleast what I consider his sagas. Homecoming was three individual stories in my opinion, with the first story the best, second, second best, and third, third best. The rest you have read are standalones, and cannot compare to his life stories of Alvin, Ender, Bean, etc. They are good, but not as good as the others.
Posts: 883 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
I agree with the others on most parts. If you want character development, then the Ender series is a must read. However, I disagree about homecomming. I found that I fell in love with the characters in homecomming very easily. They seemed very VERY real to me. Maybe it is people at different stages of life, or merely what we notice when we see people in real life, but I truly fell in love with the Homecomming characters. Also, some of the things you mentioned not liking about them were crucial to the book. Sevet and Kokor still being basically shallow idiots is not all that unrealistic, espescially between sisters, even when they're great-grandmothers. If you've never met it in real life, consider yourself lucky. Elemak's weird obsession with power is twisted and sick, it is supposed to be. Again, we have people like that in the real world... and Nyef's desperate attempts to please them probably stems alot from the fact that they make up his entire life. It isn't like here where if you don't like your family you can just move away and create a new pseudo family somewhere else. I agree with you that I would have liked to know more about what happens to the chilren's generation, but hey, he only has so much time to write. And Earthfall I thought developed the characters amazingly well. Edhadeya and Luet espescially grabbed at me, and I like the transformation and depening of Shedya.
Songmaster was one of the weaker OSC books in my opinion. It's sad that hand to be one of your first few experiences. He has other, much better, stand alones. Enchantment is a beautiful, funny, fun read. Lost Boys has excellent charachter development, but is a real soul wrencher.
Personally, though, what surprises me is your screen name. Perhaps it is because I never read any of the other druid books, but I recently listened to the first two "High Druid of Shanarra" books on CD... I don't remember what they are titled, I think Jaka Rus and Tenequil. They're decent enough to listen to while I'm doing the more mindless tasks I must do at work, but I found them rather shallow. The characters don't seem to get any true depth. They stay predictable, and never seem to have any random internal conflicts. I think Princess Leah must be right, people must notice totally different things when they read, because I'm astonnished that anyone who could like Pen enough to take his name could see a character like Mon or Didul or Akma as anything but amazingly developed.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to say that I, too, have always considered character development a strong point in OSC's books. I think he does is very well.
I would also point out that there are different ways of telling a story. One might refer to what OSC calls the "MICE Quotient." MICE stands for Milieu, Idea, Character and Event. Each one comes with it's own kind of storytelling format. Character stories, of course, need fully developed characters, but some of the others don't require it because the conflict that needs to be resolved is not about a certain character, per se. Forgive me, OSC and others, if my relating of this info is off. I'm just saying that not ALL stories hinge on character development.
Posts: 293 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Whoever saw a movie that ditched its main characters and never came back?
It's the movie called life. That did throw me off about OSC when I first started reading his books, the years-long gaps and the dying off of characters, but I think it's interesting once you get used to it. Most fiction out there is far different from real life--that's why most movies are set up differently than his stories.
On the Homecoming series, Pen, I agree with you in that it left me a bit frustrated and disoriented. I enjoyed the story, but found much of the later books difficult to connect to. Maybe it's because I haven't read the BoM, or because I'm not old enough to relate to the characters, but the connection just wasn't superb.
I do disagree with your "connect the loop" argument, because I feel that sometimes things are better left unsaid and inferred. I could understand why Doon was called the "Devil" by some by putting together what I had read about him.
I would strongly recommend the Ender series and his newer stand-alones; to me, they are his better works. Welcome to Hatrack, Pen!
Posts: 973 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for the response, guys. I find it intereseting the convergence of responses, but to summarize what everyone seems to be saying:
*I didn't read the best books Card has to offer; I should read other stuff first. I'm not sure I like this, but I'll hear you on it. *The character development is more realistic, even if it's not good for a novel. I'm not sure I like this either, because much in the novels is unrealistic (e.g., dozens of people born in the desert with no motherly deaths, and other Sci-Fi truths which don't hold up under scientific scrutiny). But I'm of the opinion that an author, if he wants to add this type of material, should make it work, which I don't feel Card did.
quote:I recently listened to the first two "High Druid of Shanarra" books on CD... They're decent enough to listen to while I'm doing the more mindless tasks I must do at work, but I found them rather shallow.
Interesting. Some of my favorite books ever. The only exception to a good character seems to be Cinnaminson; people on the Terry Brooks forum hated her.
quote:I do disagree with your "connect the loop" argument, because I feel that sometimes things are better left unsaid and inferred.
posted
I also find character development the thing I like best about OSC's writing.
I do agree that Homecoming is different, because it's based on the stories in another book (the Book of Mormon), so sometimes there aren't convenient "wrapping up" of stories just because they were real people, and not all real stories "wrap up". And if you're basing a story off scripture, you can't have your characters grow and change if they don't in the original - and scripture isn't known for showing the "bad guys" in a very understanding light. It definitely was hard to go from the first four books about the same characters to the last book set several hundred years later.
I disagree about Worthing, I think it's one of his best books; I just wish there was more of it. It feels more like a series than a book. I wish there was more room to flesh out some of the stories.
I do think you'll love the characters in the Ender's Game and Ender's Shadow series, and in the Alvin Maker series. And my favorite of his stand-alones is Enchantment. Wonderful characters there. Real people.
I like how he takes historical figures and manages to help us understand how/why they might've done the things they did - because his characterization is so strong, I really appreciate and understand the real historical figures more. Like Moses in Stone Tables, and all the women in Women of Genesis, and Christopher Columbus in Pastwatch.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good gravy, I found Terry Brooks' writing to be extremely lacking in storytelling and character development. Take the Magic Kingdom of Landover series for example. I struggled through the first two or three and finally quit. I don't think character development is Brooks' strongpoint at all. The plot dragged as every detail....was....spelled....out....in...excruciatingly....obvious......and.....boring.....prose.
The way Brooks' characters struggle with choices is almost childish in its simplicity. I'd understand the character's conflict in a matter of a couple sentences, but 2 pages later Brooks was still going on and on about it. It was very aggravating to read.
Somehow OSC keeps the story snapping along and lets you fill in the blanks. You have to make inferences, logical deductions, and take your own understanding of people and put it to work. I think Card's characters are much better developed than Brooks, and he integrates them into the story better.
With Brooks I get this broken feeling- well, I've done some character development for awhile, now it's time to move the plot along. We'll stop here for some more character development, oh, time to tell more of the story. I don't get that feeling of breaks from Card, everything is nice and smooth. His characters, story, and universe are very integrated and fit together smoothly.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
OSC does plan his stories ahead. He has said that he writes an extensive outline of the story from start to finish. He has admitted that the story changes from outline to draft, though... which is natural. None of the writers I've known or learned from (Name Dropping to Follow: KD Wentworth, OSC, Larry Niven, Jerry Pournelle, Robert Sawyer, Kevin Anderson, Jay Lake) cling to their outline. The closest I've seen is Tim Powers, who makes a calendar-type outline so he doesn't have to think about plot.
As far as character development and Brooks vs. OSC: in what way did any of Brooks 'Shanara' characters develop? Shea remained the same throughout 'Sword;' Wil didn't change at all in 'Elfstones;' Brin was static throughout 'Wishsong' despite flirting with the Ildatch's power at the end. The only two characters that I can think of offhand that change in Brooks' series are...oh, crud, what's the Dark Uncle's name? And the main character from the Landover series.
I don't think Card is writes character development so much as he writes character. I don't think there's a more powerful writer out there when it comes to character-- it's why Card could write authoritatively (HA!) the excellent book, 'On Character and Viewpoint.' He's simply a master at deep penetration POV.
For a good example of this in Songmaster, Card switches between Ansett's POV, Este's POV, Mikal's POV, Rikard's POV-- all effortlessly. Each character justifies their own feelings and actions within the context of the story's flow. It's a beautiful thing, and Songmaster is one of Card's strongest character works.
Hart's Hope is my particular favorite when it comes to character. It's a terrible (read: as in, Great and Terrible Day) book-- full of pain, and suffering and redemption and horror, and loss and betrayal-- but the characters are real. It's a tough book to read, but satisfying for all that. (Not for immature audiences...)
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, everyone has their own cup of tea, but OSC has been my brand of choice for awhile, so I'll chime in Homecoming, Harmony series--I like the pacing. It is kind of like a zoom lense on the character's lives, close up for the first three books, then out in the fourth to cover the rest of their lives, then way out in the fifth to see the consequences of their actions. Reading this series always makes me feel like I've just lived an entire life.
Not closing the loop can be good or bad, but as long as the essential parts of the story are filled out, I like it, and I tend to do it when I write. Life is filled with uncertainties, sometimes people drift away, and you wonder what happened to them. Sometimes you catch snatches of events that hint at a larger story, but you are left wondering what the beginning and the end were, etc.
And now for my recommendation, try Treason (or, "A planet called Treason") if you can find it. It is a single, and again covers a good amount of time, but it's a great read.
Posts: 105 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I only managed to get through the first ... 3 Shannara books. I think it was 3. The Sword, The Elfstones, and The Wishsong or whatever. I really struggled to get through them. They seemed very childish with zero plot depth. I can't remember specifics really. I blocked most of them out. I do remember marking them as "Fluff" and going back to my good ole OSC.
I guess to me, your way of looking at books is "varelse". I don't think I could force myself to read "The Worthing Saga" and not see a book full of depth and emotion and meaning. I don't think I could read "Enchantment" and not find myself wanting to know more about Russian mythology. And heck, "Pastwatch" is one of the books that solidified my choice of majors! I've read a lot of books. Everything from Plato to George R. R. Martin (those are some pretty dern good fantasy books right there, if you haven't read them). And no author has influenced me more than OSC. He's influenced my thought processes more than I'll even admit to myself. That is how I mark a good book. Whether or not it has influenced the way I think. And OSC wins that battle against Terry Brooks hands down, no contest. And that comes back to your viewpoint being varelse. I don't understand how you are looking at the same books I am looking at and not seeing what I am seeing. So really, this post has no point. It's like trying communicate with the ... Formics. But I'm in an impassioned mood tonight and this was a good conduit for my passions. Apologies for any rudeness you may have percieved, Pen, and thanks for making the opportunity for me to vent.
Oh, and welcome to rack!
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm looking forward to reading the books of Pen Ohmsford, who can so lightly criticize Orson Scott Card.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: I don't think Card is writes character development so much as he writes character. I don't think there's a more powerful writer out there when it comes to character-- it's why Card could write authoritatively (HA!) the excellent book, 'On Character and Viewpoint.' He's simply a master at deep penetration POV.
::nods:: I agree completely.
Out of curiosity, Scott, what other authors do you see as being in Card's league in terms of character writing? Octavia Butler and George R. R. Martin are the only two that I can think of. Tad Williams and Robin Hobb are both skilled at it as well, but I don't think that they're quite on the same plane as Card (though I think that Williams is quite close, and I haven't read any of Hobb's most recent work, so she may very well have improved).
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
For some reason, I think criticising a fundemental element of an author's style is much harsher than just criticising a plot choice or particular work.
I guess it's the difference between, "That's an ugly sweater you're wearing," and "You're ugly."
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Out of curiosity, Scott, what other authors do you see as being in Card's league in terms of character writing?
Geez...
Maybe Robert Parker, but he almost doesn't count since he writes his best stuff in first person.
Robin Hobb, too. The chapters with Kenneth in 'Liveship Traders' were exceptionally well done. Kenneth was this completely amoral jerk, and she made him...sympathetic. (Up until book 3 anyway)
GRR Martin and Tad Williams...mmm, I dunno. I've really enjoyed what they've written, but I haven't read too much of it. I don't want to make judgements. Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's OK, guys, I'm just trying to have a conversation about Card's style. If we can't talk openly about our likes and dislikes of his books, then why bother having forum discussions at all? Just a conversation, not intense criticism.
As for Terry Brooks vs. OSC, I think some of you may have a point. Terry Brooks seems to take forever to get some of his characters developed. If I felt frustrated with OSC for not doing enough, I felt the opposite about TB; he went too far, giving too much detail, and they often doubted themselves to an annoying extent. I want to ring his neck and say "get on with the plot before I fall asleep!" But I always felt, once the series gets started, then it can get better. Also, I do like Terry's later Shannara books better, though you might not like them if you didn't like books like Elfstones. I recommend the Shannara, not Magic Kingdom series (only read the latter once you've started the former); and only go for his contemoprary fantasies if you don't mind taking a very long time on details - even I thought it was too much.
Worthing Saga: I thought this book showed the most of any I read. I thought, in fact, it wasn't long enough, as some of you have said: it should have been longer. If he'd taken more time on certain aspects of the book, I would have loved it. I liked what happened in the current era, with Lared, and also all what happened with Jason, and Abner Doon. The planet of superhumans got kind of dull: there's not as much drama when people are practically omnipotent. But, if I'm not mistaken, wasn't it his first manuscript ever?
Other authors... I've not read well enough to talk about that. Sorry guys.
Posts: 11 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pen, I was not trying to attack you, I was merely trying to point out that I think we are noticing different things. Like most of the people here I am an avid Card fan. The first time I read Enders Game I was in absolute shock. I sat back and was like "finally, someon UNDERSTANDS". As I read more and more I became even more impressed, espescially with his biblical and historical characters. As Jenna pointed out, he takes bare bones acts and makes the historical figure into a real PERSON, and even if he has to take artistic liberties, it makes everything feel so much more real and alive. At times when I am reading his books, I have to force myself to remember that they are NOT real people. I've found myself yearning to have a conversation with any number of his chraracters. To me none of that ever has happened with Brooks. Cinnaminson and Pen had a relationship that seemed like it might have been taken out of "Sweet Valley High". It was entertaining enough, but it never brought out the depth of emotion I have in Card.
In terms of other authors who do well... There is a series I read one book from, and am waiting to find the second, but I can't remember who wrote it. It was called A Game of Thrones, and the character development in that was better than I've seen in anyone outside of Card for a long time.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, Pen, I'm glad you came back. I was afraid our responses might've driven you away. I'm just gonna second wad DDDaysh said: We notice different things. I have no doubt it's a lacking on my part, but I really don't pay much attention to style, except on a subconcious "I like" or "I don't like" level. I never really think it out. What I look for in a book are ideas and concepts which appeal to me, and OSC succeeds in that to the extent no other (fiction) author has. So he holds a special place in my heart and I reacted maybe a bit adversely to your criticism, for which I apologize. I really shouldn'tve even posted at all . It's not my area of expertise or really even interest.
And DDDaysh, if I'm reading you correctly, you're looking for George R. R. Martin and his "A Song of Ice and Fire" series.
posted
Yeah, I think that's it. I was listening to it on CD, so I didn't "see" it as often as I would if I were reading a book.
To be fair, I'm also reading the Wheel of Time series by Jordan. He also develops his chracters in depth, but it would be hard not to since he's only covered about two years in about ten books.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
How is the Wheel of Time series?...I've been considering starting it, but I've heard some horrible things about it, such as "it's really slow". But I've heard some good things too. It would be good to have another Card fan's opinion.
Posts: 124 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
I gave up on Jordan a long time ago. MAybe once he has his whole series out and I can read them in an uniterupted chain I'll do that, but until the series is done. . . I'm done with Jordan.
Posts: 1323 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's no disputing tastes, but there can be some more facts thrown in...
"Card fails to plan his novels ahead of time": he says the exact opposite, and warns that if you fail to plan where you're going ahead of time, you'll end up in a predictable spot. You may not like where he ended, but he *did* plan his way there.
As someone hinted, Homecoming is based on the Book of Mormon, so if that last book seems wildly out of place, consider that its plot comes from a work of nonfiction. (I had the same reaction, btw.)
I echo some others here: odds are you'd be more likely to love his most popular books. These are, I believe, Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead.
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm enjoying the Wheel of Time series, and I'm not as worried as others are about him never finishing it. Maybe he won't, but the end is already pretty well spelled out, all the important elements anyway, so if he never does finish, someone else can always write a pretty decent concluding novel. I enjoy his books, because they're very like a soap opera (even though I hate most of those) in that you get to know the characters really well, and so it's mostly just watching them live the little moments of their life. However, in terms of ther overral plot structure of the series, it probably IS glacial. It's been evident for two books already what will most likely happen in the end, and I still have three books to read before I catch up to the point where he has written, and even THAT isn't the end. It isn't as thought provoking as Card's stories are, but I find it a nice little escape from reality. He does a very good job of surrounding you with his universe and truly making you care about what is going on between characters.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
). It is my theory that anyone who doubts Card's ability to create believable, sympathetic, complicated, and conflicted characters has never read the Ender series (Ender's Game, Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide, and Children of the Mind) or the Shadow series (Ender's Shadow, Shadow of the Hegemon, Shadow Puppets, and Shadow of the Giant). I suggest you try 'em out. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
rack!
