posted
I remember when I first started posting here in high school. I had a silly question about certain phrases that I thought popped up suspiciously in a couple of his series'. He answered! I was sooooo psyched. OSC is the coolest author EVER.
And then something happened. For reasons that really don't matter, the forums got kind of antagonistic. The palpable-ness of it made ME uncomfortable, and I can't imagine how it felt to the host.
I guess my point is that a lonely kid in high school got his month made when OSC answered a silly question, and I think it's a bummer that kids that I'm sure are still connecting to his writing aren't getting the same chance I did.
posted
I can definitely empathize with what you're saying. It's always nice to have interaction with celebrities within their field of expertise . Mr. Card certainly has the credentials to be worth listening to on anything regarding literature, and especially fiction. If I wrote a story and he read it and gave me a nod of approval, I would be giddy for months.
It's when people equate the title Celebrity to a Deity that I begin to worry. For instance, in his Uncle Orson reviews everything articles, everything not pertaining to a book, I take as nothing more than an intelligent man's opinion. I give only slightly more weight to his political views as it's obvious that he does plenty of research, yet it's still a very complex subject that nobody short of omnipotent can REALLY give you more than an educated guess.
I guess what I'm saying is this: He has plenty of more suitable places to talk about writing. There's no real reason for him to post here. 99% of the questions about his books can be answered by his fans. He even said himself that some of his fans know his books better than he does himself.
For anything else that he might talk about here, he would be held up to very much higher standards than would be justified. That puts a lot of undo pressure on him that I'm sure he doesn't need.
Posts: 636 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I too agree, being a high schooler who still reads, rereads, and loves his books i wish i caould see him post, even if it's not to me.
I also used to write a comment thing to him every month, mostly about my personal writing, but he has never answered a question. So i stopped writing.
Posts: 549 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I lurked for a long while reading all of OSC's posts. Ironic that I didn't join until I had some snotty high-schoolish thing to argue with him about. But I DID get a response from him on the forum a few times, and that was definitely really cool. Actually talking about music and THINGS with my favorite author. I've met him in person a few times now and I know that people who dogpile him online would be much more reasonable in person--because all in all--he's an extremely laid back guy. And he doesn't get worked up about arguments like it might seem online--he's much smarter than a lot of people here give him credit for (not just as an author).
If I hadn't gotten involved in the forum, I probably wouldn't have become as big an OSC fan as I am.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember almost exactly 3 years ago when he was posting quite a bit. It was right when Shadow of the Giant came out. That was a really good time to be an OSC fan.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it'd take a fundamental change in Hatrack to get him to be any sort of a regular poster. But, generally this side of the board is a lot more reserved, since we save MOST of the political stuff on the other side. On the other hand, direct attacks, mild or extreme as they may be, generally happen more frequently on this side, so six of one half dozen of the other.
I have to say though, I too would love it if he would participate more here. Much of the negative impression I've gotten of him through hsi World Watch essays was washed away when I briefly spoke with him via an internet call in pod cast thing a few months ago. I decided that, for all the vitriol in his written word, and for all the political disagreements we might have, he seems like a genuinely stand up guy, and I wish I could hear more from him about things that AREN'T about politics.
I've no wish to argue with him, but I'd love to discuss with him.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think realizing how much I disagree on certain issues with Mr. Card has really taught me alot about that old phrase "agree to disagree".
It's a hard lesson for people to learn - respecting the opionions of someone who totally disagrees with you and also respecting the person who holds them. However, because Mr. Card IS such a fundamentally decent person who I respect in so many ways, the very fact that he and I are on opposit ends of the spectrum on some issues absolutely forces me to rectify the situation. Do I suddenly stop having respect for this figure who seemed so wise, so right, and so good - who inspired me so many times? That would be essentially impossible, yet some of the things we disagree on are so central to my own philosophy that I can't just say "he must be right and I must be wrong".
This very dichotomy has really forced me to internalize the "respect for all opinions" doctorine, to which I had only given lip service before. While I might not LIKE that we don't agree on everything, it has been a priceless learning experience.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ah, I don't miss Card on here. After all, the more time he's on here, the less he is writing his next book! :-)
Posts: 42 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Constipatron brings up a good point, ha ha. Still, it was nice the way he felt free to interact with his fans in a chatty/friendly way. It's a real shame that a few jackasses had to spoil the pleasantries for everybody.
I'm long out of high school (10-year reunion is this year, in fact) but I have been a long-term fan and have always been happy to communicate with OSC when the opportunities have presented themselves.
Here's my story, for airmanfour - I first contacted him just to let him know that I liked his books. I didn't expect any reply, since I'm sure writers as well-known as OSC get zillions of fan emails all the time, but he did write back and we exchanged a few fun, conversational emails for a couple of days. It left me thinking, "Wow, what a genuinely nice, friendly guy. I wish more people in the world were as pleasant as him."
I also miss his presence on the forum here, but I can certainly understand why he's not still around.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Libbie: It's a real shame that a few jackasses had to spoil the pleasantries for everybody.
It might be good to remember that there are two sides to any story, Libbie. I disagree with your characterization of the people involved in the unpleasantness as "jackasses". Well, in most casees, anyway; I can think of a couple of people who were involved that seemed to me to be deserving of the term.
Posts: 1087 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm actually completely unconvinced that Card is around any less today than he used to be. Libbie, for example, joined right around the peak of his activity; historically, he has posted much less frequently. IIRC, Card has traditionally posted here when he finds himself on the road alone or between projects, both of which are things that he's consciously trying to cut back on.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: I remember almost exactly 3 years ago when he was posting quite a bit. It was right when Shadow of the Giant came out. That was a really good time to be an OSC fan.
Yeah, that's when I joined. Man he was wrong a lot though. But so is everyone, just as much. I think an element of the problem he had with it was that he expected quite a bit of respect in a medium that is not used to that.
There are also lots of people who drive-by post, and they don't get a lot of people responding to them or reading them. In his case, he would drive by quite a bit, and everyone would notice and half the crowd was trying to get him to stay, either by "ignoring" or directly engaging, so the interaction always had an element of uncertainty and finality- not very forum-like.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I still see the whole TomD versus OSC thing as largely a conflict of cultures. TomD comes from one of the two most verbally abusive places in the US, the Upper Midwest (the Northeast also gets honorable mention in this category ), whereas OSC comes from probably the most verbally polite area of the US (I'm using Utah, although a Mormon upbringing, in and of itself, also seems to correlate with lack of verbal abusiveness), with parts of the rural South running a very close second. Even if they had more similar religious and/or political views (besides both being somewhere in the pro-life camp), I think almost any online conflict between two people with such different beliefs about what level of verbal abuse is appropriate is more likely to be fraught with hurt feelings.
The main reason I am aware of this aspect is because I have trouble connecting with a lot of the people on here who are from those regions of the county precisely because, being from the rural South, I have different beliefs re: appropriate levels of verbal abuse in everyday discussion.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not comfortable with the term "abuse" as it's being applied here. I'm pretty familiar with actual verbal abuse, and it is not -- to use an example -- saying something like "Stop mowing your lawn on Sunday morning, you freakin' Satanist!" with a twinkle in your eye.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:one of the two most verbally abusive places in the US, the Upper Midwest
I completely agree with this assessment of the upper Midwest. I went to grad school in Madison, WI, for a number of years, and it was my perception that the people there were more unpleasant to deal with than anywhere else I have ever lived. And that includes Moscow and my current home of New Jersey -- neither place renowned for a high level of courtesy.
By the way, I'm originally from Pennsylvania.
[ April 03, 2008, 05:31 PM: Message edited by: Yozhik ]
Posts: 1512 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember not really being sure about the pronunciation of "varelse" (I think I'm spelling it right). OSC responded to me and I was glowing and telling everyone who would listen about it for days.
posted
I assure you that midwesterners find southern "manners" just as rude as southerners find midwestern manners. One area is not more courteous than the other, it's just that what is considered courteous in each area is different enough that it is not recognizable as such by denizens of the other.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I'm not comfortable with the term "abuse" as it's being applied here. I'm pretty familiar with actual verbal abuse, and it is not -- to use an example -- saying something like "Stop mowing your lawn on Sunday morning, you freakin' Satanist!" with a twinkle in your eye."
Sure...but the twinkle doesn't always come across online, dude. It's not necessarily anyone's fault...it's the nature of the medium. Unfortunately, we all think we're being crystal clear in situations where others really aren't taking our tone the way we mean it. I think you yourself actually mentioned a study that showed that tone was misinterpreted about 50% of the time online.
Dana, did you have a point? And, did you want to snipe at me without me responding, or do you want me to respond? I can't tell.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know what you could possibly mean by that. Is "darn" too strong a language for you? That's just a wild guess, since nothing I posted even hints at uneasiness.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, what I meant by "verbal abuse" is, specifically, the tendency to make very pointed personal criticisms, and use that as a source of entertainment. I'll give you two examples:
1. I was in Madison, WI, hanging out with a friend, Trevor, who lived there at the time. We were talking with Jason, a guy from New Jersey, and his ex-girlfriend "Sherry" (name changed to protect the innocent, also because I don't remember her name ). In the course of talking about how things had changed since they had dated, Jason mentioned, referring to Sherry, something along the lines of "...forty pounds ago." Ouch.
2. I was in college with a french-horn playing friend from Michigan, who made the exact same comment, with the exact same wording, about a girl in the french horn program who had gained a regrettable amount of weight, but had not bought new clothes. The girl was pretty unlikable, but...ouch. Yeah, I laughed, but I was a bit shocked.
Ouch. I get that it's funny, but...
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dude, in all seriousness, it may be that you befriend people who have some latent hostility towards fat women. That said, yeah, I don't think your definition of "verbal abuse" works for me, particularly if the implication is that Southerners do not entertain themselves by pointedly insulting people. Midwesterners are just considerably more honest about it.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DDDaysh: It's a hard lesson for people to learn - respecting the opionions of someone who totally disagrees with you and also respecting the person who holds them. However, because Mr. Card IS such a fundamentally decent person who I respect in so many ways, the very fact that he and I are on opposit ends of the spectrum on some issues absolutely forces me to rectify the situation. Do I suddenly stop having respect for this figure who seemed so wise, so right, and so good - who inspired me so many times? That would be essentially impossible, yet some of the things we disagree on are so central to my own philosophy that I can't just say "he must be right and I must be wrong".
This very dichotomy has really forced me to internalize the "respect for all opinions" doctorine, to which I had only given lip service before. While I might not LIKE that we don't agree on everything, it has been a priceless learning experience.
I don't respect all opinions and I think that the idea that all opinions are equal is ludicrous unless we are talking solely about issues of taste.
The opinion of a dilettante should not receive the same respect as the opinion of an expert. My opinion on how to write a good sci-fi novel should not be given the same level of respect as that of OSC or any successful novelist. They have proven expertise that I do not. If I express an opinion on novel writing that Card disagrees with, he shouldn't respect my opinion. Likewise, I don't respect his opinion on climate change.
An opinion that is well founded in verifiable facts and valid reasoning should be given more respect than an opinion that is not. When someone expresses an opinion that is contrary to fact, you shouldn't respect their opinion. When one person presents a well reasoned and logical opinion, it shouldn't be given the same respect as a logically flawed rant.
Two "opinions" that differ but are both consistent with facts and reason should be given equal respect but that isn't the same as agreeing to disagree. At least within the sciences we have a set procedure for dealing with that situation. We design an experiment for which the two opinions predict different outcomes, run it and observe whether either of them can accurately predict the outcome. We don't just throw up our hands and agree to disagree unless its an issue where testing our ideas is impossible.
Furthermore, I don't respect opinions which I find grossly at odds with my personal values. If someone believes that Jews are an inferior race and should all be herded into gas chambers and killed (intensionally extreme example) -- I have no qualms about disrespecting that opinion. I would seriously question the integrity of any person who thought such an opinion deserved respect.
This isn't to say that I can't respect an opinion I disagree with. I can but only with in the limits I've tried to describe.
I can respect a person with whom I disagree but there are many different levels of respect. The first level of respect is respect for a person as a being with rights. I believe all human beings have a right to just and humane treatment without regard to their beliefs and opinions. All people deserve that level of respect.
But there is another type of respect, the respect we give to those we hold in high regard. I will call this respect*. Respect* leads us treat people with more than the courtesy that is every persons right. It leads us value a persons opinions, to seek their counsel and their approval, to read about them, want to see them and so forth. Respect* must be earned.
When a dilettante publicly and repeatedly disagrees with the experts I recognize in a field, my respect* for them drops. When someone persistently expresses opinions that are contrary to fact and reason, my respect* for them drops. When I find someone holds opinions that grossly violate my values, my respect* for them drops.
Sometimes when I like a person, I intensionally avoid discussing issues where I suspect knowing their opinion would cause them to fall in my respect*. That's why I generally avoid reading OSC's reviews and world watch essays. Too often what he says in them causes him to fall in my respect.
[ April 03, 2008, 02:46 PM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
What you said Rabbit, may be true in some extremes. However, the very nature of a "fact" is in itself essentially an opinion. I'm not saying that you have to agree with someone. You don't have to live your life in the same reality that they do, but respecting opinions IS important.
It does get hard when there are people that are full of hate and hurtful to other people. You don't have to let them HURT that person, but you have to respect the fact that they have that opinion. I was listening to "To Kill A Mockingbird" recently, and I believe that one of the hardest and worst parts of the books is when Aticus (not sure how it's spelled) absolutely refuses to see himself as a better person than his obviously racist neighbors. Yet, in the end, hating someone for being hateful only adds more hate to the world. Eventually you have to accept the fact that everyone is entitled to their opinion and all opinions ARE equal in their right to an existance. That doesn't mean you have to hold all opinions, or that you can't BELIEVE other people are wrong about things. However, there are some people that still believe the earth is flat (not many, but a few). I obviously think they are wrong, but they believe all my facts are lies made up by the devil. You have to admit, that's possible. My belief that the sun is a ball of fiery gasses might be a "fact" but really, it's just an opinion. It's my opinion that the telescopes that show Earth as a ball are accurate and not a lie by Satan. Somone else can be of the opinion that this is false. Scitzophrenics are, after all, often quite intelligent. Yet, they see facts all around them that we call dillusions. Their belief in these facts doesn't make them stupid, just... beings from an existance unreconcileable to that of most other people.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you're arguing over semantics here. I think Rabbit is trying to say that you don't have to respect their opinions themselves, not that you don't have to respect their right to have one.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with Rabbit and Nick. In fact I think you agree with Rabbit too Dash.
quote:My belief that the sun is a ball of fiery gasses might be a "fact" but really, it's just an opinion. It's my opinion that the telescopes that show Earth as a ball are accurate and not a lie by Satan. Somone else can be of the opinion that this is false.
She isn't disputing the fact that people can and can't have opinions, what I think she's doing is saying it's not wrong to place a qualitative value on that opinion. If you're trying a case in a courtroom against someone who has committed murder, and you call two witnesses up to the stand, one a literal expert witness who is widely accomplished in the field of criminal psychology, and another who has seen every episode of CSI, there's a clear qualitative difference in their opinion. That's not a perfect metaphor since that's less about science, but I think you still get my drift.
She's not saying that you can't HAVE an opinion, she's just saying that she doesn't have to give it equal weight to someone who is clearly more qualified in the field where the opinion resides. Frankly I think that'd be obvious.
Oh, and I couldn't disagree more about Midwesterners having the worst manners and being the most verbally abusive. I went all up and down the eastern seaboard this past summer. And I'll freely admit that the nicest city we were in was Charleston, and the rudest was by far Atlanta. People in Kentucky seemed very nice, but I felt people in Tennessee were very rude. It was a mixed bag of results. And to be honest I've rarely had a very nice experience with people in Detroit proper, but in the suburbs everyone I meet is pretty polite.
I wonder how much of this culture clash is rural vs. urban vs. suburban, or in the case of steven's example, just a random example of two guys being douchebags. I don't think it's nearly so regionally clearcut.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think their are several factors to this subject that we might be confusing. In order to determine the amount of respect to grant to someone on a subject. First you have to determine if the subject itself is subjective or objective. For instance, I can't say anything against him when OSC talks about his favorite brand of Chocolates or restaurants. It is in these subjects that nearly everyone's opinion holds equal value.
An example of an objective subject might be mathematics or some aspects of physics. Their are several branches of science that fall in between the subjective and objective ends, and therein lies my next crucial distinction.
That distinction is between an opinion and a theory. A theory is the result of analysis and/or research. It's what you use when you want other people to believe what you say. Theories are necessarily falsifiable, whereas an opinion might not be. If I say "Red is my favorite color", then you can't really say anything to it, but if I say "Red is more gentle on the eyes what with having the lowest wavelength of all the colors on the visible light spectrum", then you could dispute it. The real tricky part of this distinction is when you have opinions based on research and/or analysis, but do not necessarily constitute a theory.
Anyone serious about science will agree that Theories INVITE dispute. A good scientist ENCOURAGES people to attack their theory. Opinions based on research and/or analysis however can be a bit touchier to dispute. The reason being is that the perpetrators of such aren't usually scientists. They don't necessarily WANT their ideas to come under scrutiny.
In a non-scientific environment, attacking someone's research and credibility can be, and often is taken personally. This is especially true on an internet forum, where anonymity obscures people's credentials. Eventually, you get so sick of hearing crackpot theories and armchair analysis with incomplete information that it almost becomes the DEFAULT to immediately attack people when they put forth their ideas. Granted, it isn't nearly as bad here at Hatrack as some other forums I've frequented, but it exists here non-the-less.
As you start to lose your anonymity however, your credibility shifts. Namely, you get more in your area of expertise, but may LOSE some in other unrelated areas. For instance, if I say that I'm 25 years old, then I lose credibility nearly across the board due to being younger than many of the more frequent posters. If I say that I'm single with no kids, then my opinions on relationships and raising children lose a considerable amount of weight. If I say I'm an atheist, then I'm likely to be ignored in any theological discussion.
Sometimes losing a bit of your anonymity can HELP your credibility. For instance, I'm not likely to argue physics with King of Men, or Climate change with Rabbit, or Medicine with Claudia Teresa.
The problem as I see it is that OSC has lost anonymity in nearly every direction. His credibility scale gets more and more fine-tuned with every article he writes. As such, people think they KNOW what he's right and wrong about, and are more likely to jump at him whenever he strays from his known areas of expertise.
If there was some place where people thought they knew me better than I know myself, I would probably avoid it too.
Posts: 636 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I used to have an email correspondence with him that lasted over the span of several months. I asked him questions about writing and some of my critics, which I found very helpful. It ended when I ran out of questions, but I kept asking some because I didn't want to lose this wonderful resource and well of insight and knowledge, but I did. No biggie. I took what I did from his emails. It was still pretty cool. They weren't general messages either like 'Follow your dreams and may you have many adventures in writing!' These were very specific emails; so that was cool.
Posts: 4 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
I remember in 2005 when Mr. Card posted in Rivka's "We Are Amused" thread. At first I thought it was just someone fooling around with an alias, but then I saw the tell-tale "Administrator" designation instead of "member". With a shock I realized it was him and quickly posted an overly alliterative tribute.
Then I sent Rivka a gushing email, along the lines of "OMG, you won't believe it but OSC just posted in your thread!"
She plays it cool in the thread but she was pretty excited too.
Over the next few weeks (months? not sure of his posting schedule) OSC posted occasionally-- I think he had just finished a novel or project and was relaxing. Sometimes I interacted with him, and that was very special to me, to have a discussion with a favorite author.
I also miss him here at Hatrack and hope he comes back soon.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey all, I'm pretty new to this forum (by pretty new I mean this is my first post). The reason that I joined was actually because of this thread. I have a story for you, its not about direct interaction with Orson Scott Card, but the impact was as powerful as if I had sit down with him personally.
I'm a junior in high school right now and am doing pretty well where grades are concerned. I had taken the SAT's and ACT's, and becasue of that, I was getting letters from collages (you all know, you've been through the crazy collage application process). I then realized...I didn't know what I wanted to do. Like, at all. Ever. Throughout my high school career, I had been pretty much focused on teaching science when I graduated collage. I LOVE science. As a junior, I had already maxed out all of the science classes that my school had to offer. Earth science, Biology (honors and AP), Chemistry, Physics, Anatomy, Biotechnology, Environmental science, astronomy, and even went to our local collage (UCCS) and took science classes there. I mean, I was SET on what I wanted to do.
But, and this is what I didn't understand, I didn't really...feel right with my decision. I love both teaching and science, so what was the problem? When I get to a problem that cannot easily be fixed, I go to my own personal stash of old favorite books and pick one. An easy read, yet reminds me of the time when I read them. As I was searching through the books (for i knew that the book i picked was going to have to be a doozy to help me with this problem), I came upon a book in there that I actually hadn't finished! WHAT?! The book? Maps in a Mirror, a collection of short stories from my MOST favorite author. I picked up the book, sat down, and read for days.
The first story that I read was Ender's Game, the short story that gave birth to 1 of the 2 fundamental books in my life. So, i read that and then finally started off where I left off in the book, in the middle of the Flux section. When I finished the stories, I went to the afterwords. What I love MOST about OSC (Can I call him that if I'm new to the forum? Oh Well) is the fact that he explains why he wrote what he wrote. Even though i didn't realize it, the pieces were coming together.
I then moved onto Map in a Mirror, the fables and Fantasies book. The first book was Unaccompanied Sonata. Oh...my God. Wow. The story gave me chills. The first time Christian broke the rules and lost his fingers? I literally had to stop reading and sit there. Barely controlling my emotions, I moved on. When He lost his voice. I lost it. I cried, actually CRIED at something in a book. That doesn't happen often for me. And just when I didn't think i could get any lower, the story ended with him hearing the songs he created as a road worker, with the name Sugar.
I sat there for a long time after the story, thinking. Then, in a crazy rush of...I don't even know...I realized, I loved biology, but that isn't what I wanted to do. I wanted to write. I didn't even care what I wrote about, short stories, novels, poems, columns for the local paper, plays, little melodramas for junior highers. I didn't care, i LOVED writing deeper than anything else in my life. It felt so...so completing.
This is how it happened: After the story, I sat there and thought about, if the thing that i needed most in order to do what I love the most was taken away, what would it be? I thought and thought and thought and came up with this answer: My hands. I told myself that it was because then I couldn't help my students with anything. But, I then had the same empty-ish feeling I had when I was focused on science. No, it was not because of science. It was because of...because of...WRITING?! WHAT? Yes, it was writing, wow. I then looked closer at the story (meaning I re-read it twice over). Who Christian was know as was not Christian, it was Sugar. What Sugar was know for was not his sonatas and instrumentals as a composer, but his songs and stories as a singer. It wasn't until AFTER what Christian had thought he valued most in his life was taken away that he TRULY began what he was really meant to do. It wasn't until after science had been taken away from me that i realized that writing is what I truly was meant and wanted to do most. By far. Thank you thank you thank you Orson Scott Card for showing me TRULY what my life would be about. Thank you
Now, I'm not trying to dissect, review or critique the story, I'm just telling what it meant to me, personally. This is what I think writing is about. IMPACTING the reader so hard that they look into themselves and find something, anything, that they didn't see before.
Aaaah. Thank you thank you THANK you Orson Scott Card. You've impacted my life so greatly, there is nothing I can do to repay you. Actually, i could write a best selling book and dedicate it to you as the motivation. Yeah, that'll do i guess. Sorry the grammar and tense of this are so screwed up, I just was so excited to write.
Was that a good enough story?
Posts: 12 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Awesome story, Looker. Welcome to the forum.
I was also a science geek in high school. I was the only student to have taken AP Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. I was captain of the Science academic bowl team junior and senior year (we won the superbowl both years).
I went on to eventually get a degree in music--and Unaccompanied Sonata was undoubtedly an inspiration in my formative years as a musician. Keep writing and posting--and check out the other forum (Books, Films...)
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, thanks for that Launchywiggin. It actually means a lot to know that somebody else made such the drastic change from science to the arts. Not that science isn't sexy, those angiosperms really get me...riled up...haha.
I tried our Science Olympiad, but when they handed me a yard stick and told me to calculated how many liters of water the room could hold. Then how much oxygen could be dissipated in that water. Then what the volume would be if we froze the water. Then how much percent oxygen was in the frozen water, I cried and ran from the room.
Is there a place on these forums where people can discuss and bounce around ideas about writing?
Posts: 12 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, you can visit the Writer's Workshop forum or chat over in Books, Films, Food, and Culture. There are many writers on the forums.
After getting an overview of how "stuff" works, I became much more interested in how people work, which is why music, books, and art became a bigger part of my life.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
), whereas OSC comes from probably the most verbally polite area of the US (I'm using Utah, although a Mormon upbringing, in and of itself, also seems to correlate with lack of verbal abusiveness), with parts of the rural South running a very close second. Even if they had more similar religious and/or political views (besides both being somewhere in the pro-life camp), I think almost any online conflict between two people with such different beliefs about what level of verbal abuse is appropriate is more likely to be fraught with hurt feelings.![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
