I'm Ckaos. New here. I've had alot of questions about OSC invade my mind lately, and I was hoping there might be a few fanatics here who could help me with some answers. ;-)
Okay, so I first read Enders Game as a Freshman in college. Loved it, but didn't have time to really enjoy it as I was too busy reading other, much more boring things like John Locke.
Then about two months ago I read Ender's Game again and I loved it even MORE than I loved it the first time. You see, IMHO I think that....in Ender's Game at least .... OSC does an outstanding job in his capture of human nature. I mean, I really REALLY felt as if the characters were real people. Not to mention that the writing style throughout the whole thing is awesome. Anyhow...
After that I read Lost Boys. Loved it. Great book. No complaints.
Alright, so, just last week I picked up a copy of Speaker for the Dead and I am having a hella awful time with it. The writing style (the narrative voice, shall I say?) is nowhere NEAR the level it was with Ender's Game. It's um...dare I say, boring? Not only that, but the dialoge is awful. All I'm saying is, Ender's Game is SO sharp and SO Fresh and the narrative voice is so modern. Then I get to Speaker for the Dead and the style is just completely different. I'm definately sensing some kind of underlying strain in the writing. If OSC's name wasn't on the front of the book, I would bet a million dollars that he didn't write it because the writing style is so different from Ender's Game.
I've noticed that the writing style in Speaker for the Dead is strangely similar to the writing style in The Homecoming Series (is that what it's called?), which I must admit I detest as well (but mostly for other reasons).
Can someone please help me to understand the differences I am noticing?? Please don't misunderstand, I am not trying to bash OSC. I have great respect for the man, and Ender's Game continues to be my all-time favorite SF novel. I cannot, however, be silent in my observations. I believe I can be a fan as well as critic. Neh?
Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
posted
Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead are completely different types of books. I think SftD is just as well-written and is just as good a story as EG.
But then, I think the Homecoming series is superb storytelling, but I didn't learn to love it until the third time I read it.
Posts: 751 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
in Speaker for the dead and the other ender books the subject changes. It now follows Enders life and in all 3 books there are some very deep moral plots, and scientific ideas. Its not a book that is easy to just pick up and read a few pages and put down.
However it is extremely interesting and just as good as enders game. every single book in the Ender series has been different and full of life, and i have enjoyed every second of reading them.
Posts: 19 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The writing style (the narrative voice, shall I say?) is nowhere NEAR the level it was with Ender's Game. It's um...dare I say, boring? Not only that, but the dialoge is awful.
Funny. I find Speaker for the Dead to be one of the most richly beautiful and emotionally resonant books I've ever read, as well as one of the best mystery tales I've read.
Posts: 2689 | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ender's Game and Speaker for the Dead are completely different types of books. I think SftD is just as well-written and is just as good a story as EG.
in Speaker for the dead and the other ender books the subject changes. It now follows Enders life and in all 3 books there are some very deep moral plots, and scientific ideas.
I'm not saying SftD isn't a GREAT story. It is! The plot is classic OSC, and I agree that it's amazing in that it deals with deep moral issues and scientific ideas.
The only thing I'm taking issue with in SftD is the writing style. I wonder WHY OSC chose to write SftD in a way that is completely different from the way Ender's Game is written. I'm sure that OSC had a perfectly logical reason for doing it, and I would like to know what the significance is -- and why he chose that particular style for SftD. Again, my question is completely focused on the writing style...the VOICE of the book. Can you tell I'm an English major? ;-)
You see, I LOVE Speaker For Dead. Its such an amazing book, imo, BUT....I thought Ender's Game was just OK.
For me Ender's Game isn't a classic. Sure, the thing about the Buggers and of course the twist ending are great, BUT I just did not like the young Ender character at all. I couldn't relate to him, didn't find him all that interesting, and couldn't get into his situation that much.
But I kept reading after Ender's Game, because I wanted to find out what would happen with the Buggers. That was interesting to me.
Then I read Speaker For the Dead and was blown away.
I like adult Ender alot in Speaker and I also like the family he adopts alot too.
I was just drawn into Speaker so much more.
But you know, I hear people all the time saying, " Ender's Game is classic" and then if anybody mentions Speaker or the other books, most people will either say they were OK or they thought they weren't very good.
I'd disagree. Ender's Game is OK, Speaker For the Dead is just mind blowing.
And Xenocide, whew. Just an awesome book (two awesme books really).
Heck, I would have loved Children of the Mind if not for what happened to Ender (didn't like that..).
As it stands, I think I still like Children of the Mind better then Ender's Game.
Now, ENDER'S SHADOW, that imo, is classic. Its a MUCH better telling of the Battle school events, imo.
Also I like the character of Bean so much more then young Ender.
That said, I still like Speaker For the Dead and Xenocide better then Ender's Shadow.
I do love the Shadow series though (haven't read Shadow of the Giant though! Hopefully soon). I think overall, it is the best of the two series, but Speaker For the Dead and Xenocide just wow me.
And btw, I read the first book of the Homecoming series and I disagree that Speaker & Homecoming are written the same way.
I did like the first Homecoming book, but it didn't have, imo, as interesting characters as Speaker (or as interesting a plot, imo). In fact, I think the first Homecoming book is a little boring compared to Speaker..
DF2506 " Like they say though, to each his or her own! "
Posts: 128 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You have to understand, really, a few things.
First, there is an obvious change in pace between EG and the Speaker 3. Pacing in novels is always something you have to adapt to. Some people cannot stand it and give up. Books that usually have slower paces, in my experience, seem to be richer in description, character development, and morals and values.
Second, even though it is a sequal to EG, the Speaker 3 are, in their own way, a different series. At this point in time, Senior OSC is or will be writing a novel to connect the 3 series (Shadows included), but they are neverless different.
Senior OSC has said that EG stands alone in his Enderverse books. There aer many reasons for this, but I really won't scratch the surface. Besides the obvios differences (i.e. pace), EG seems more blunt with its message, while the Speaker 3 semm more deep.
It's just different writing styles. I think that if Senior OSC wrote them any other way they would significantly have lost their value to the readers.
I probably just confused you in my ramblings, but, oh, well.
posted
For some odd reason, I've never cared all that much for the first book in either Ender series. Speaker for the dead was a great book, but I though the ones that followed were far better. As for Ender's Shadow, I never really cared that much for this book. I'm glad it was written, since I like the shadow series as a whole, but the book itself never really sparked my interest.
Not really sure what that all had to do with the topic. But I thought it was interesting and decided to write it.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Read Enchantment. And, if you don't mind Mormon stuff, try Folk of the Fringe. Also, I find the Shadow series much more engaging than the Ender books after EG; you might try them. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
to the OP, Perhaps the different style of writting is used to designate that this new ender has learnt alot, and become a much different person. Perhaps this was OSC's reason for changing the style, to represent the difference in the character from EG to SftD.
Just my opinion. as my english teacher once said "if you can back up your ideas with observations i can never mark it wrong" Whether that is true i don't know, i haven't studied english since 10th grade (2nd year uni now) so i am not a big literary person Posts: 19 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Books have different rhythms and tempos, as well as different subjects and characters. Ender was full of jeopardy and action, but Speaker is structure as more of a mystery; in addition, I was covering a large stretch of time, and had my most difficult character as the viewpoint character in the first incidents in the book. It makes it much tougher sledding. Not everyone who reads EG will like Speaker (and vice versa).
But I'm content with that. Not everybody will like ANY of my books; and even those who really like one will still have others that just leave them ... uninterested.
So ... life is short! Move on! Read something else - mine or someone else's!
However, I will point out that I wrote the whole Shadow series precisely to create REAL sequels to Ender's Game - that is, to create books that are much closer in pace and rhythm and tone and experience to reading EG. So don't read Speaker. Read Ender's Shadow and its sequels, and see if I can be forgiven ...
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Forgiven for what? For being an accomplished craftsman?
If you can write a book like Speaker for the Dead (a style I shall refer to as mysterious romanticism from now on) and at the same time produce the post-modernistic sharpness of Ender’s Game, then you truly are “the better maker,” to steal a line from T. S. Eliot.
Thank you, Mr. Card, for answering the question I’ve wanted to ask for a very long time. And thank you, everyone, for your thoughtful insights. My gut feeling told me that the differences in style were deliberate and significant. I’m glad to know they were.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to the bookstore to pick up a copy of Ender’s Shadow. It’s going to be a great weekend, folks.
posted
I love ALL of the Shadow and Ender books. however I prefer EG+ ES+ Shadow series to the remaining ender series. However SftD did make me at least cry when i reread it.
Posts: 1567 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Remember that I used to post my novels online in their entirety. It's not about royalties, it's about invading the memories of as many readers as possible, like computer viruses and catchy melodies.
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
yeah, I think sftd, although I enjoyed it it's significantly less acomplinshed, in my view, then Enders Game...
...however, it was a much more ambitious and difficult thing to try and write I would say, and so you can undertand how much harder it would be to piece together a seemless narrative!
One thing I felt was that the kind of "revelations" in the book were worked up to an anti-climax infact, coz you sort of half predicted them and half knew what to expect... and then when your suspicions were confirmed it didn't strike as such a big deal. Such was my experience of the book anyway.
I enjoyed it though, don't get me wrong, and if nothing else it's worth reading as a prelude to Xenocide which I thought was pretty excellent.
posted
I loved the difference between EG and Speaker. I felt like Ender's Game was a brilliant introduction to the characters and a really great idea of what _could_ happen. Speaker for the Dead and its respective sequals introduced so many theories to me, and those have stuck since I read them a number of years ago. Speaker, Xenocide, and Children were all contemplative books, and yes, the narrative took a little work to get into, but it was fun to find books that didn't happen as much as they thought. The ideas presented were absolutely mind-blowing.
(Mind you, the only thing by OSC that I haven't liked was one short story from Flux. = =)
Posts: 5 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[The Wave]](graemlins/thewave.gif)
S-K-I-T-T-L-E-S
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
=)
