I’d just like to start out by telling you that I love your books! You are, perhaps, the greatest science fiction author who is still living today. The amount of sales generated from your best-selling Ender’s saga is proof of this. I confess, however, that the main reason I’m writing you is not to adulate your ego, but to offer some advice that may anger you. I want you to know that my intent is not to anger and that I harbor no ill-will in saying what I will say. In fact, the reason why I’m saying this here is because I’ve received no response as to how to contact you directly, after asking around without so much as a response. (And so I fail to understand why, if you don't want to be contacted directly, you don't explictly say so on your official website.) But still, I feel this needs to be said because I want to return the favor that you’ve done me by writing such beautiful fiction.
Basically, I think that you need to try to relax more, and I mean this earnestly. As an empath, I can tell that you are carrying a very heavy burden. Please don’t worry so much as to how I know this, but ask yourself whether it is true, and if it is not, there is no reason for you to continue reading this letter. I believe that it’s alright to carry this burden if you wish to. I know how this is because I am carrying a similar burden. The extent to which you beat yourself up about it is the extent to which you pity others with the same burden, and what you send out into the world is what you get back, so it perhaps in your own best interests to tell yourself that it’s okay to be who you are and God is not going to punish you for being human with temptations, since to be human is to be tempted by this or that. All these so-called ‘ problems’ are like intelligence in that it can be used for good or evil. Therefore I believe it is not always the case that we should never act upon an inclination to do something, for whether or not we should act upon a temptation is left up to our own judgment. Although God (if you believe in Him) is the ultimate judge of all, we must also have faith in ourselves rather than acquiesce to those who purport to know the will of God.
You may be wondering how I know this about you. I know this for the same reason that you know how to conceive of characters that are realistic. We are both empathic in that we know how to put ourselves in the shoes of another. You prove that you are very skilled at shifting your perspective in your book, Character and Viewpoint. It surprised me that you had mentioned the word “homosexual” in the this book more than ten times even though you had no reason to do so, giving the impression that you knew what it was like to see things in the way that a homosexual sees things. What was especially surprising about this is that I had learned that you had also written a few articles against homosexuality, making claims that gave readers the false impression that you had absolutely no clue what it is like for homosexuals to be homosexual. I’m talking about such claims such as, 'it's a lie to say that homosexuals are deprived of any civil right pertaining to marriage since, to get those civil rights, all they have to do is find someone of the opposite sex willing to join them in marriage'. While this may be true of heterosexuals, it is far from true of homosexuals, since the inability to love women is precisely what makes a homosexual a homosexual. By the same token, we can see how this kind of logic can be applied to the other side of the debate. All those who claim that permitting gay marriage would be granting special rights and privileges to a minority -- and therefore somehow disrupt the balance of the status quo -- are proven wrong. For now, we can just as easily see that if gay marriage were allowed in a given area, everyone in that same area could enjoy that same civil right; all dissenters would have to do is find someone of the same sex willing to join them in marriage. But surely, as an intelligent person capable of empathy, you realize that either point is equally as moot. I am telling you this not because I have a bone to pick with you. I don’t even accuse you of being a homophobe. Rather, I am telling you this because it gives your readers the idea that you’re a hypocrite and that what you had written in Character and Viewpoint is a lie. I don’t believe that you are a hypocrite and I don’t believe that you’re consciously aware of the contradictions in your writing. I only say these things in behalf of your own interests. I don’t have my own agendas and I’m not trying to turn you to the ‘dark side’ of homosexuality. If you’re straight and you want to be straight, then that’s what is best for you. It’s important not to misinterpret me as insinuating that you are a closet homosexual. I don’t pretend to know your past or present, but the fact of the matter is that few, and certainly not all, homosexuals were sexually abused as a child so the phenomenon as a whole is not as pitiful as you seem to imply.
I’ll leave you with one thought. What I’m saying is not defamation. It is only defamatory if we both assume that there is something wrong about what I’m talking about, which I most certainly do not. Since you seem to assume that something is, its “defamatory” nature depends on your own perceptions. Since our beliefs create our own reality, which do you think is the better way to see things? Perhaps what God or Satan did not want us to realize is that Heaven and Hell are both right here on earth, simultaneously, but you don’t have to accept such an interpretation to accept my pragmatic concerns. I tell you this because I feel empathy (not sympathy!) for you, since we are alike in a few ways. I want you to be able to let go of your burden so as to be a freer person, like I have become. I, of course mean freedom as a state of mind, and not in terms of it being the absence of external constraints. While both freedoms are real, complete freedom is both.
I realize that saying this may go against your rules here, and that you may want to sue me because of this. However, I believe that there are some things that we need to do that are considered “wrong” or illegal to some, that are in fact for the greater good of humanity, and this happens to be one of those things. As a Christian, surely you must agree with Kierkegaard that a teleological suspension of the ethics is sometimes necessary to do the things that we have faith in. So, like Abraham, I am taking a leap of faith here in trusting that what is said here won’t be used against me. It’s my opinion that it can’t be used against me because I have spoken no evil; only the truth. Therefore your stringent restrictions do not frighten me and neither should they frighten anyone else, by means of controlling their behavior. Of course, if they said something that was actually defamatory, then I would agree that it would be well within your rights to sue, as you are a very important person and you don’t need to be brought down to their level.
posted
So what exactly are you trying to say? I mean, that was a lot to write to come out confusing on the point you're making. I am, however, tempted to check if you're using empathy and sympathy how you think you are
And don't get me started on your "theology"
Posts: 162 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I’m talking about such claims such as, 'it's a lie to say that homosexuals are deprived of any civil right pertaining to marriage since, to get those civil rights, all they have to do is find someone of the opposite sex willing to join them in marriage'. While this may be true of heterosexuals, it is far from true of homosexuals, since the inability to love women is precisely what makes a homosexual a homosexual.
I believe OSC is speaking from a logical and legal point of view here. If marriage is defined as a bond between a man and a woman, then any man and any woman can get married regardless of their sexuality or their feelings for one another if they want marriage rights under the law. However, the "gay marriage" issue isn't about marriage, it is about civil property and custody rights, and should be treated as such, and that is why he says that civil rights are not being infringed upon when you are talking in terms of marriage.
Of course we are also talking about a man who writes characters. As an example, OSC is a practicing christian, but he has written many characters of other religions. He has even created new religions in some of his books. So while he can understand where a person is coming from, he doesn't necessarily agree with their point of view. Of course he would be a horrible author if it was any other way.
Truthfully I don't know if he understands homosexuality or the drives behind homosexuality because he is not a homosexual. There is no genetic proof of sexual predisposition, and until there is, he and most other people will continue to believe that it is a lifestyle choice that is controlled by concious or sub-concious drives in your brain.
At any rate, his religion says it is wrong, nature says that the physical act is pointless, his has concerns that lie in the area of whether or not it is possible to have a healty family environment as a homosexual household, and he can't identify with the personal homosexual point of view, so I can understand why he would have the opinions he does.
just my 2 cents
Posts: 232 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't agree with OSC on a lot of things....
But I bet we both believe you are an idiot right now, if he thinks anything about you at all.
Who says that your repeated inquiries haven't reached him? Maybe he just has nothing to say to you, nor does he have any obligation to respond to you regardless of what you say, or what you want to discuss.
I would say that people like you are the reason (or one of them) that he rarely visits us here any more.
posted
I'll get some frozen custard with you, but I don't think Uncle Orson will go to Culver's with us Posts: 162 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This letter says far too little in comparision to its length. You could have made this far more concise.
Since kacard obviosly saw this, i'm assuming OSC did too, and i really hope he made more sense out of your letter than i did. For example, what on earth are you talking about what you say he carries a burden? i'm sure he does carry burdens, but you explained next to nothing about what you were actually talking about.
The whole big paragraph in the middle seemed to be about how he could put himself in the place of gay people even though he wasn't gay himself, so that makes him epathetic. fine, i agree with that. but that's all you have to say. five or six sentences. it gets your whole point across. not an enormous painfully long paragraph.
And now that we've established that, what the heck are you trying to say? You know that he's carrying a burden because you are empathic, and so is he, and....?
I think he makes some interesting points on OSC's views of homosexuality, and as I disagree rather greatly with OSC on this issue I have a little sympathy for the point.
But other than that it sounds a lot like crazy ramblings, and crazy ramblings don't usually get very far.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now now, this was written in the best intentions by someone who felt that the author would recognize a perceived conection between himself and the fan (even though they had never met) through the writing of the letter.
Haven't you ever read something from an author before and REALLY REALLY wanted to talk with them about their ideas and thoughts?
I have. I usually then remind myself that I am just some guy in Texas with no real personal contact to the author other than my money which is now in his pocket.
Was it naive of the poster to post this here? Probably.
Is it right for us to mock the poster for trying to communicate with someone who he perceives as someone worthwhile to talk to? Probably not.
A simple "OSC doesn't really respond to posts like these." seems a little nicer.
But hey, I am a big softie and not all about the cynical wit.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
kwea says that if it s the year for the cynical wit then you allneed to pay him and he expects it to be retroactive to the year he was born.... not that he really expects you to pay him with his being cynical and all .
Posts: 325 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I read the post, and I admit that English is not the best of my languages - just ask Kwea and he'll tell you about my "Jenni-ese". Did anyone else have as much trouble as I did understanding what this guy was saying? Was there a point to all this in there somewhere that I completely missed? Posts: 325 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
I think he's relying heavily on both his and OSC's empathy to allow OSC to understand what he's saying.
Posts: 162 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a fellow "person who is able to feel what others feel" I can tell you, oh poster of this letter, that you really need to keep your empathic feeling to yourself. Reasons. 1. You sound crazy 2. OSC probably doesn't care one cent about your post. 3. It is extremely rude to show forth your observations to a person who has not asked for your advice. And finally... 4. That is really the wrong weed to be smoking.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember reading OSC's books and feeling shocked and delighted that my own thoughts were dancing through someone else's words. I also remember finding the site and what a fabulous experience that was. I hope this person can have as good of an experience.
Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
Continue believing what you believe, unless you choose to change your mind.
That we'll probably never meet (I don't make it to NC too often these days) is my disappointment, but I doubt it particularly keeps you awake nights.
Based on your essays, it's obvious to me that we disagree on many topics, and agree on many more. What a wonderful relationship for two strangers to have! How unique!
Good evening, all. Lisa
Posts: 230 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's a great, great difference between frozen custard and soft serve. If you've had frozen custard, you'd know Posts: 162 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey Bryan, can I buy some pot from you? I'm not much of a pot-smoker, but the stuff you have is obviously reaaally good. I can tell because, uh, I'm empathic. Or something.
Oh, and by the way, writing a rambling, nonsensical post on somebody's message board is not grounds for a lawsuit. OSC couldn't sue you for this gibberish even if he wanted to. And even if he could, I doubt he'd bother. His time and his money are more important than this.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:There's a great, great difference between frozen custard and soft serve. If you've had frozen custard, you'd know
C'mon, dude, spill the beans. Is it custard-flavored? Is that the difference? Like the stuff in a bismarck donut?
Posts: 2292 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: I tell you this because I feel empathy (not sympathy!) for you, since we are alike in a few ways. I want you to be able to let go of your burden so as to be a freer person, like I have become. I, of course mean freedom as a state of mind, and not in terms of it being the absence of external constraints. While both freedoms are real, complete freedom is both.
quote: I only say these things in behalf of your own interests. I don’t have my own agendas and I’m not trying to turn you to the ‘dark side’ of homosexuality.
I get the impression that you’re extremely burdened. How can you say you don’t have an agenda? If you weren’t burdened or have an agenda then why would you have gone to such lengths to lecture someone about how flawed you think they are based on your perception of them? Why do you care what Orson says or believes? Why does it matter to you so much?
My belief is that one of the heaviest burdens that one can take on in life is to personally invest themselves in what other people think of them. My belief is that it is also a damaging and pointless expression of my spiritual soul to buy into what people think of me. I don’t believe that empathy is intended for such activity.
If you would like to empathically try to understand me you are invited to do so. But don’t be fooled by what you think you perceive.
posted
Even though this was mainly for Card and not for you guys, I think I should clarify some of my more obscure points lest everyone get the wrong idea. What was perhaps naive of me was to think that Card would actually read this. But if he doesn't, he doesn't. I'm not even entirely confident that saying this will have any effect whatsoever. That's why it's advice..advice that could be not as pragmatic as I think it is, and such it's not my choice whether it is accepted or not. I'm not even in a position to know what might happen if it is "accepted".
I didn't expect Card to reply; that much doesn't matter to me. I did, however, anticipate that I would be mocked and ridiculed...such is human nature.
When I speak in terms of empathy, I don't mean Diana Troi empathy, but the ability to try to put yourself in another person's shoes to get a better idea of what they might be feeling (not thinking). I know this sounds presumptous of me, and if I came to these conclusions by logical deduction, it would be, but I came to these conclusions intuitively instead. I leave open the possibility that I am completely wrong, but you guys are no better at knowing with any degree of certainty than I am. That's why I said, "if this isn't true of you, you don't have to read any more".
So, no, I'm not on drugs, I'm not a religious nut, and I'm not as fanatic about being a fan as I must appear. I understand that this sounds a little flaky, but I don't know how to say it without sounding like a lunatic to some.
As for being a dagger wrapped as a gift, if this is a dagger it's not my intent, but even if this is a dagger, I'm not the one wielding it.
As for trying to get something out of this, maybe I am and maybe I'm not, but it's not what's been imputed to me by some others.
quote: What was perhaps naive of me was to think that Card would actually read this
I'd like to point out to you that kacard is OSC's wife. Maybe you should pay some attention to her post. Posts: 5700 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
How do you determine between an emotional response to OSC's writings and intuition? Why is intuition better than logical deduction?
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: Why is intuition better than logical deduction?
Because Kirk was better than Spock. It's was true in somebody's fantasy world, therefore it is true in real life.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Intuition isn't better than logic. Both are tools that are used for different jobs. While logic can be driven by our emotions, intuition is above that, at least in theory. When I get an intuitive insight, its as if something hits you all the suddenly on a level that is far above knee-jerk emotional responses. My explanation is admittedly inaccurate but I'll just play it safe and say that I cannot be 100% sure that my intuitive insights aren't dependent upon my emotioanal weather, but that is true of just about anything.
Also, I'd like to apologize for being forward and possibly rude in the sense that I am not conforming very well to social conventions. It's said that a spoon full of sugar can help the medicine go down but sugar has never been my forte and it's wrong of me to pretend that I can produce sugar. It should be noted, however, that Neo from the Matrix never had any sugar when he chose his pill. The truth is two-faced in that it can hurt us or it can help us, depending on how we choose to perceive it. That's why I don't want this to be uncritically accepted as "true" or "false" by the reader, as I don't want it to be accepted unless it's actually true, which I am not 100% entirely sure that it is. I strongly believe that it's true, but belief is belief and truth is truth. Sometimes we just need faith to mediate between the two.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
LMAO ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
