posted
I just finished "Children of the Mind," and noticed some glaring inconsistencies:
1) At the beginning of "Children," Ender visits Novinha at the monastery. At first she doesn't want to speak to him, but in "Xenocide," she said it was alright for him to visit her. She forgives him for Quim for what seems to be the first time, but in "Xenocide," she had already forgiven him. She says that she does not regret committing adultery, but in "Xenocide," she said she must deny the flesh because her sin for so many years was adultery. Ender says that he wants to join her at the monastery, but in "Xenocide," he says that he can't do it. The whole scene plays out as if the meeting in "Xenocide" never took place.
2) In "Children," Jane's death is still an issue, and it is discovered that her aiua doesn't stay in one place but is rather constantly moving throughout the network of ansibles. But in "Xenocide," Ender learns in a meeting with the Hive Queen that Jane's aiua is inside him and that shutting down the network will only temporarily cripple her, not kill her. This was a triumphant moment in the book.
3) In "Children," Jane is able to move the starships of Lusitanians Out and In without having Ender or one of his other selves (Peter and Young Val) aboard. But in "Xenocide," Jane can only move starships with Ender or his other selves since Ender, as I said before, contains her aiua and she must go with the ship. In "Children," when her aiua is in Val, she actually has trouble moving herself Out and In, and she decides that she shouldn't do it very often.
Was anyone else irritated by these contradictions? I enjoyed the book, but it really bothered me that parts of it either completely ignored or forgot significant points in "Xenocide." I'm surprised that Card, who seems to plan his novels very carefully, could miss such obvious mistakes.
posted
You should consider putting <spoilers> in the title. I'll give this one a shot considering I just finished rereading both books.
1)
quote:At first she doesn't want to speak to him, but in "Xenocide," she said it was alright for him to visit her.
In Children she was in the middle of weeding the garden in a form of penance (think Rice farming to the godspoken of Path) when he arrived. Plus it is not an inhuman trait to not want to talk to someone at a particular time, especially when preoccupied with something of importance.
quote:She forgives him for Quim for what seems to be the first time, but in "Xenocide," she had already forgiven him.
In Xenocide all Novinha says is that she realizes Quim could not have been stopped because it was in God's plan, and that she will see him again after death. There is no explicit apology. And in Children she apologizes right off to reaffirm with Ender if nothing else.
quote:She says that she does not regret committing adultery, but in "Xenocide," she said she must deny the flesh because her sin for so many years was adultery.
I don't see this as a conflicting issue. Yes, she does not regret her affair with Libo and no, she does not deny that her adultery was a sin. She merely questions whether God would look beyond her sin to the children she made and forgive her.
quote:Ender says that he wants to join her at the monastery, but in "Xenocide," he says that he can't do it.
This is reaffirmed many times in the book. He decides sometime in between Children and Xenocide to let his spawn children deal with the world saving while he goes and lives the rest of his life with the one true romantic love of his life. Not really an inconsistancy, just a change of mind.
2) First, this is just speculation by the Hive Queen, who makes brash assumptions, and this turns out to be a half truth. While she does live inside Ender after the ansibles are cut off she is rejected by the host and must find an alternate body to live. The Hive Queen has never had to deal with unwilling hosts as no Formic has an auia of its own and thus any part of the network can be given at any time. The concept of an entity owning its own auia is foreign to the Hive Queen when she makes her assumption. Likewise, In Children the main issue ISN'T her death as they assume she will live on, it is whether or not they can reconnect her to a large enough network before the fleet comes to be able to help with the mass migration of Lusitania.
3) Whether or not she could move people out and in without her aboard was speculation. She also thought in Xenocide that her auia was bound to Ender and his other selves, while in Children it was found out that her auia was everywhere in her network and was not bound to a single being. She is thus able to control the ships through the computers onboard that she is connected to. There was a scene with the M.D. Device where Peter and Wang-Mu had to press the missile to the ship so Jane could analyze it to make the trip out and in. We can thus presume that Jane can transport anything that has come into some sort of contact with a part of her network containing her auia which in Children was found out to be the full extent of her network and not just Ender.
Most concepts in the realm of Science Fiction aren't perfect or they'd be put into practice. If you read OSCs books in particular from a nitpicky science fiction perspective you're bound to miss out on the true meanings of these works. Just my 2c.
Posts: 8 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:In Children she was in the middle of weeding the garden in a form of penance (think Rice farming to the godspoken of Path) when he arrived. Plus it is not an inhuman trait to not want to talk to someone at a particular time, especially when preoccupied with something of importance.
I see no indication that it was a form of penance. She was just working in the garden. When she said the weeding was more important than him, it was meant as a cruel joke. It wasn't like, "I'm busy right now, can you please come back later?" It was more like, "I told you I didn't want to speak to you, go away." Novinha had sent him a message that said she didn't want to have anything to do with him anymore, which is what prompted him to show up in the first place. She wasn't exactly angry with him, but rather wanted to be apart from him because she thought that was what was best for both of them. That's my interpretation, anyway.
quote:In Xenocide all Novinha says is that she realizes Quim could not have been stopped because it was in God's plan, and that she will see him again after death. There is no explicit apology. And in Children she apologizes right off to reaffirm with Ender if nothing else.
Not true. In "Xenocide," Novinha says, "...my rage at you was unrighteous." She also says that she wants them to be together again. Sounds like an apology to me. When she relieves Ender of blame again in "Children," he says, "I didn't know that, but I'm glad to find it out," as if she was apologizing to him for the first time.
quote:I don't see this as a conflicting issue. Yes, she does not regret her affair with Libo and no, she does not deny that her adultery was a sin. She merely questions whether God would look beyond her sin to the children she made and forgive her.
She says, "How can Christ forgive me when I don't even repent?" She sees her adultery as a good thing and doesn't feel bad about it or really consider it a sin at all. But in "Xenocide," it's one of the main reasons she's there: "But my sin for so many years was adultery that my only hope for joy now is to deny the flesh and live in the spirit."
quote:This is reaffirmed many times in the book. He decides sometime in between Children and Xenocide to let his spawn children deal with the world saving while he goes and lives the rest of his life with the one true romantic love of his life. Not really an inconsistancy, just a change of mind.
There's no indication that he changed his mind. It wasn't like, "I've been doing a lot of thinking since our last meeting, and I've decided I want to be with you." Instead he talks to her as if he never had any doubts, that, immediately after finding out what she had done, he came there to join her.
2)
quote:First, this is just speculation by the Hive Queen, who makes brash assumptions, and this turns out to be a half truth. While she does live inside Ender after the ansibles are cut off she is rejected by the host and must find an alternate body to live. The Hive Queen has never had to deal with unwilling hosts as no Formic has an auia of its own and thus any part of the network can be given at any time. The concept of an entity owning its own auia is foreign to the Hive Queen when she makes her assumption. Likewise, In Children the main issue ISN'T her death as they assume she will live on, it is whether or not they can reconnect her to a large enough network before the fleet comes to be able to help with the mass migration of Lusitania.
In "Children," nowhere does it mention Jane lives inside Ender, even though this was a huge revelation in "Xenocide." That was why I thought it extremely peculiar when the Hive Queen was searching for Jane's aiua when they had already discovered it was in Ender all along. Then it turns out her aiua is cycling through the network. There is no indication that they made a mistake before. First they conclude that Jane is in Ender, then all of a sudden they have no idea where Jane is, then they find out Jane is flowing through the network. Also, in Chapter 3, it says that Miro's "dearest friend would die." It is assumed that Jane will die when they shut down the network, which is why they are trying to find a way to transplant her aiua in Val.
3)
quote:Whether or not she could move people out and in without her aboard was speculation. She also thought in Xenocide that her auia was bound to Ender and his other selves, while in Children it was found out that her auia was everywhere in her network and was not bound to a single being. She is thus able to control the ships through the computers onboard that she is connected to. There was a scene with the M.D. Device where Peter and Wang-Mu had to press the missile to the ship so Jane could analyze it to make the trip out and in. We can thus presume that Jane can transport anything that has come into some sort of contact with a part of her network containing her auia which in Children was found out to be the full extent of her network and not just Ender.
Again, they never say that what they thought in "Xenocide" was wrong. It was just ignored, as if it had never happened. "Children" constantly refers to the other books, so it doesn't make sense not to say, "Oh, remember when we discovered Jane's aiua was in Ender. Turns out that through some experimentation with Jane's powers, we were wrong."
quote:Most concepts in the realm of Science Fiction aren't perfect or they'd be put into practice. If you read OSCs books in particular from a nitpicky science fiction perspective you're bound to miss out on the true meanings of these works. Just my 2c.
I understand that concepts in science fiction don't have to be consistent with respect to the real world, but they should be consistent internally. If one book establishes one idea, the next book can't contradict it without sufficiently explaining the discrepancy. I'm usually not one to nitpick, but these inconsistencies jumped out at me while I was reading, and I felt compelled to share my feelings. I appreciate the novel's greater themes, and I love the Ender Quartet as a whole. Card is one of my favorite authors, but I think he made some careless errors in this book.
posted
If you think the Ender books have "careless errors", you haven't read enough sf to know the true meaning of "inconsistency". Every book series has little problems, and you don't need to take them too seriously. It's fiction.
Posts: 973 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CRash: If you think the Ender books have "careless errors", you haven't read enough sf to know the true meaning of "inconsistency". Every book series has little problems, and you don't need to take them too seriously. It's fiction.
I hardly think they were little. I understand authors sometimes screw up details, and that's forgivable. A character might be holding a hotdog in his right hand, and then two pages later, it's in his left. It has no significance in the overall story, so no big deal. But these were big plot points, involving Ender's relationship with Novinha, Jane's true nature, and the extent of her powers. They didn't ruin "Children of the Mind," but they did sort of ruin "Xenocide," which I thought was the superior novel. It's as if parts of it were completely erased. Certain events and elements just disappeared.
I'm tired of the "it's fiction" excuse. I don't expect literature to be perfect or even realistic (I had no problem with the whole philote idea), but I do expect a basic consistency. Surely, I'm not the only one who was a bit frustrated. Perhaps I was more affected because I read the books nearly back-to-back, and the disparities were more obvious to me.
If the changes were, in fact, done on purpose, then it raises an interesting question: Do authors have the right to alter their own universe, or does the universe belong to the readers after it has already been given? I wondered the same thing when "Star Wars" fanatics were angered by George Lucas's revisions to the trilogy. I understand it was his vision to begin with and he should do whatever he wants with it, but I also understand that people had fallen in love with their own vision and didn't want anybody, not even the creator, to touch it.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess I just view these things as clarifications instead of revisions or mistakes by the author.
For example,
quote:That was why I thought it extremely peculiar when the Hive Queen was searching for Jane's aiua when they had already discovered it was in Ender all along. Then it turns out her aiua is cycling through the network. There is no indication that they made a mistake before. First they conclude that Jane is in Ender, then all of a sudden they have no idea where Jane is, then they find out Jane is flowing through the network.
I would view this as three different steps of enlightenment.
1. They discover that Jane's aiua is very strongly linked to Ender. They assume it is physically located in Ender.
2. When they look for Jane's aiua they can't find it because some of their previous assumptions about the physical properties of an aiua were wrong.
3. They learn the true nature of the aiua and understand that it is flowing through the network.
The correct understanding is not really known at first, but gradually the truth becomes clearer and clearer. Does the author need to specifically state which ideas were clarified or updated? No, it's assumed just like it's assumed that the characters actually do use the bathroom even though it's not specifically mentioned every few pages.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by camus: The correct understanding is not really known at first, but gradually the truth becomes clearer and clearer. Does the author need to specifically state which ideas were clarified or updated? No, it's assumed just like it's assumed that the characters actually do use the bathroom even though it's not specifically mentioned every few pages.
The thing is, it wasn't gradual. It was more like, "I don't know where it is...oh, it's in Ender...I don't know where it is...oh, it's in the network." There was no "oh wait, it's not in Ender, let me rethink this" in between. To make the assumption that it happened behind the scenes is a little farfetched to me, especially since the thoughts and feelings of the characters are thoroughly described throughout the novel. Imagine if Sherlock Holmes concluded that one guy was the killer, and then in the next chapter he suddenly thinks someone else is the killer without any explanation. Are we to merely accept that he had a revelation between chapters?
Besides, even Mr. Card admits he changed his mind between volumes. I was wrong that they were careless mistakes, but I was right that they were inconsistencies.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:I understand authors sometimes screw up details, and that's forgivable.
I believe OSC himself said, at some time or other, that he had changed his mind, possibly even between volumes, or something to that affect. I'll look for a link.
So, no, he didn't screw up, he changed his mind. Which brings on your next question...
quote:Do authors have the right to alter their own universe, or does the universe belong to the readers after it has already been given?
To me, an author undeniably has the right to make any changes he/she wants to in any of their work, regardless of release date or popularity. I would be suprised if it wasn't a tough decision, but ultimately, it is his to make. If the audience doesn't like it, they, likewise, have the right not to read it anymore.
I would just see this as OSC making a judgement call on what he thought would work best for the story, the characters and the message of the work. If you don't agree with that call, that's fine, but it doesn't make him wrong in any way, shape or form.
Edit: Ah, just saw where you admitted that it wasn't a mistake. You may disregard the first part. Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
In Ender's Game the Little Doctor wasn't a missile, it focused beams. In Children of the Mind, it was a missile. No problem, says I, it's 3000 years later, obviously a different version of the weapon. But then in Ender's Shadow it's a missle!
Posts: 454 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As far as MD device, heck, there's no reason they couldn't have both a beam weapon version, and a bomb or missile version (for larger, less agile targets). It's probably more of a JMS-esque 'moves at the speed of plot' thing, though. The story in the later Ender series required something that could be disabled, so it's a missile instead of an insta-kill body-melting death ray. Posts: 5422 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I believe OSC himself said, at some time or other, that he had changed his mind, possibly even between volumes, or something to that affect. I'll look for a link.
That was earlier in this very thread.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well... maybe I read it wrong, but I thought that it was a "beam" of sorts in all the books, but in Children they wanted the ships to survive, so they put it on a missle with a "timed" detonation of the "device".... Maybe that was just "wishful reading" but it made sense to me. As far as the other "flaws" go... there are TONS in the Ender series. For instance, the number of students in Ender's Jeesh changes from dozens to only a handful. The number of simulators at command school was only like three or something when it was being Explained to Graph, but somehow ALL the jeesh members had them to practice on.
Sometimes they errors are frustrating to a reader, but they are inevitable. There isn't a single series I've ever read with NO internal inconsistancies.. The closest is Chronicle's of Narnia, and even that one has it's share. The author might change their mind, or simply forget in the midst of all the millions of details. To some readers it might be obvious, but the author is often looking at many other things. And sometimes, not all readers find the same details important enough to notice inconsistencies. For instance, both my friend and I are avid Harry Potter readers. However, when book five came out and they announced that James Potter had NOT been a prefect, I was seriously ticked off. My friend hadn't even noticed, but I was upset because it seemed to contradict his ability to become "head boy" as Hagrid had described him him book one.
However, no matter what, you just have to deal with them. I long ago decided that the best way for me to deal with them was to try to find a scenario where maybe they weren't "mistakes" after all... and if I can't do that, then I just try to ignore them as best I can. For instance, the number of "jeesh members" I must just ignore, but you already have several good explanations about the discrepancies in Xenocide and Children of the Mind. As far as the interplay between Novinha and Ender goes, if you don't read it as inconsistant, it can actually make the book better. Characters might be black and white, but real people rarely hard. Husbands and wives often replay and reforgive old arguments hundreds of times, sometimes pretending they've never been had before. Sometimes they even BELIEVE they really are talking about something completely new because the pain they're feeling from it is new. And women are notorious for feeling differently two days in a row.... I should know, I am one. There are some days when I would think the guy I was dating hung the moon, and the next I would wish we'd never met, until noon, and then not be3 able to wait to get off work to see him. It's just what happens with people. Instead of seeing these as "inconsistant" you could try to imagine what Novinha might be thinking to react that way in two seperate times, or what might be going through Ender's head.
As far as the thing with Jane goes.... you could either think that they "changed their minds" or perhaps it has something to do with how Ender's body was degenerating, or any number of possibilities. The point is the possibilities are out there. I know it's frustrating at first, but if you start trying to change your mindset instead of letting your frustration fester, you'll have a much better experience with any fictional or science fictional series.
P.S. If you think Ender is bad, I would seriously recomend you avoid reading anything to DO with Star Wars.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
I appreciate your thoughtful comments. I think I've done a pretty good job refuting all of these arguments against my alleged inconsistencies, so I can't really force myself to change my original position (I know, I'm stubborn). But I guess it all comes down to the individual reader and how far they are willing to stretch their imagination (mine is limited apparently). One might see something as a mistake, and one might not.
I agree that people in real life often repeat arguments and have mood swings, but I cannot convince myself that that is the case here. Instead of contriving ways around the inconsistencies, I think I'll go with your alternative option and just ignore them. Or perhaps "accept" is a better word. After all, nobody's perfect. I still think they're inconsistencies, but I've gotten over my anger.
It's actually sort of a relief that Mr. Card admits to changing his mind, at least for some of the discrepancies. A contradiction is less frustrating when it is consciously made, even if I don't believe it is necessary.
I'm also a "Harry Potter" fan, and I did not catch that mistake about James either. You obviously have a better memory than I do. I'm impressed that you remembered something separated by three volumes. That's crazy.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have an unfortunately precise eye for many details. It's a curse, I do have to get really creative or I'd drive myself nuts over the tiniest contradictions. It also means I have a hard time writing ANYTHING because I can never move my story along because I'm constantly having to align ever detail.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
DDDaysh the Change of numbers for Ender's Jeesh doesn't change. His Jeesh in the Shadow series refers only to the members who were with him in the final battle. Doesn't include every one who was at command school and invloved in the earlier battles
Posts: 16 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, because when Bean was practicing as Comander there was definitely a very specific number of students involved that was much smaller than the number listed in Ender's Game.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Imagine if Sherlock Holmes concluded that one guy was the killer, and then in the next chapter he suddenly thinks someone else is the killer without any explanation. Are we to merely accept that he had a revelation between chapters?
That's a pretty weak analogy since that whole series is explicity about us seeing just how Sherlock Holmes figures everything out, especially his own explanations.
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cheiros do ender: That's a pretty weak analogy since that whole series is explicity about us seeing just how Sherlock Holmes figures everything out, especially his own explanations.
Sherlock Holmes was just the first mystery that came to mind. Regardless, in any mystery, one revelation should not contradict another without some explanation. It doesn't have to include every detail, just enough to let the reader know what happened. To assume that the characters merely discovered some other clues behind the scenes is absurd. One of the main pleasures of a mystery is following the protagonist on his or her investigation.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
It may not be the whole purpose of the story, but it's certainly a significant part. Just think how much time the characters spend trying to solve a problem or understand the nature of something. They may not be mysteries in the usual sense, but an unknown is presented and, by the end, a discovery is made. The last two Ender books are essentially studies of human relationships revolving around scientific and philosophical mysteries.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well... then I'm back to my first point, you must broaden your mind and work out the inconsitencies in a way to make the consistant for you. It's not impossible, though it requires a decent amount more thought, but shouldn't that just make it better?
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: 2) In "Children," Jane's death is still an issue, and it is discovered that her aiua doesn't stay in one place but is rather constantly moving throughout the network of ansibles. But in "Xenocide," Ender learns in a meeting with the Hive Queen that Jane's aiua is inside him and that shutting down the network will only temporarily cripple her, not kill her. This was a triumphant moment in the book.
Well, that's not quite right. The thing is, in Children, it was still a major concern because while she would technically still "live" there was no guarantee how she would come back, so in effect, although her Auia would still exist, where would it go? Just to live inside of ender was the equivelent of a death sentence unless they could find a way of sorts to preserve her memory. The Aiua in Peter -was- Ender, but as it did not have all of Ender's memory, it was not necessarily "ender as everyone knew him" and was allowed to try a different path. The same could have been said for Jane. Same spirit, maybe, but different end result. And everyone knew Jane as their friend and wanted to keep that identity alive.
quote: 3) In "Children," Jane is able to move the starships of Lusitanians Out and In without having Ender or one of his other selves (Peter and Young Val) aboard. But in "Xenocide," Jane can only move starships with Ender or his other selves since Ender, as I said before, contains her aiua and she must go with the ship. In "Children," when her aiua is in Val, she actually has trouble moving herself Out and In, and she decides that she shouldn't do it very often.
Jane needed her Aiua with the ships to move them because she had never done it before. One has to figure lots of practice made it less so. But the case with Val is different. In that case, it wasn't her "Aiua" along for the ride, where it could still circle many other places - although that was still true; it's that her Aiua was responsible for the upkeep of Jane/Vals body. Which she found "new and exhilerating" When Jane was along with Ender/Val/Peter, she was only there as a presence inside them, she did not "control" them. This split attention caused Val/Jane to go comatose as she did the ship movement, finding it difficult to do both. That's why she found it something she would not do again.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In regards to the MD as a "beam" I'm not sure that was ever the case; just because that is how it was explained to Ender, a kid, doesn't make it so. It's just how he perceived it to be - like the rays in the battleroom; not necessarily as they were on the ship, as he had never seen any of those actual ships, etc.
And, maybe MD is available in both forms A beam for combat in space amongst ships; a missle for larger scale attacks. (moons, etc.)
Posts: 202 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
1) Novinha is neurotic and codependent. She's supposed to create emotional upheavals by being unstable. You might as well wonder how she could be so intelligent but emotionally immature.
2) The Hive queen's speculations on how the aiua worked were just that. The book was about people trying to study this phenomenon but not having the luxury to do so in a safe and scientific way. Also, the aiua was rooted in Ender, but with Val and Peter running around his aiua was no longer rooted in himself, so when Ender keels over that kind of creates a complication.
3) Jane's aiua was never completely contained within Ender. It was not whether she had an aiua, but whether she had a body that was the complication.
So, yeah, these things aren't really bothersome to me. I wondered about the MD beam/bomb thing before though, and I think the technology just might have changed over the course of 3,000 years. You know. Maybe.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This makes me think about how characters change throughout the books. Sometimes the character itself changes, sometimes it is only our perception of the character that changes, and sometimes it is the perception of that character through the eyes of another character that changes.
A good example of that is Peter. Not only does Peter change as he grows older, our perception through Ender’s eyes changes, and from the beginning of Ender’s Game to the end of Shadow of the Giant our own personal perception changes. In one instance you could describe him as a cruel monster. At another time you might describe him as caring. Those are completely opposite descriptions. Taken independently they may seem to be contradictory, but taken together they are part of a larger truth, and that larger truth is consistent even though the individual parts may not seem like it. As we learn more and as each new book is written, we eventually get closer and closer to that truth.
And when a character changes, there’s not usually a moment such as where Ender would say, “wow! That really changes what I previously thought about Peter based on thoughts a, b, and c, which is now being replaced by thoughts x, y, and z.” It just kind of happens gradually and over time.
This is the way I view certain concepts. Sometimes the author’s views change, sometimes the characters’ views change, and sometimes it’s our own views that change. And like it is with characters, sometimes the ever changing details are less important than the overall truth.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Having reread these books recently (I've actually just started Children) these "mistakes" are pretty irritating. I don't really care whether OSC "changed his mind", the thing with Jane is especially irritating, particularly after such a big deal was made of her being in Ender in Xenocide. The least he could have had was a discussion in Children to the effect of well, No she's not in Ender after all. It wouldn't be a big deal if Children were not the second half of Xenocide but as it is it's a bizarre and annoying change.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BryanP: Having reread these books recently (I've actually just started Children) these "mistakes" are pretty irritating. I don't really care whether OSC "changed his mind", the thing with Jane is especially irritating, particularly after such a big deal was made of her being in Ender in Xenocide. The least he could have had was a discussion in Children to the effect of well, No she's not in Ender after all. It wouldn't be a big deal if Children were not the second half of Xenocide but as it is it's a bizarre and annoying change.
What a joke. You find these to be irritating? You probably wouldn't even have noticed them if someone else hadn't pointed them out. You should be irritated at EpicanthicFold87, not an imperfect author. Besides, just because he think's it's inconsistant, doesn't mean it actually is. Look at the first one, it's about Novinha being fickle. It's a woman's prerogative to be fickle. Not to mention that 30 years pass in between. Maybe she got sick of Ender visiting, she's a bitter old woman! As for the adultry, one view comes from Novinha, the other comes from the Donna Cristao version of Novinha which really only existed to push everyone away.
Jane's death? In Xenocide, it was learned that Jane was twined with Ender, yes? They really didn't know exactly how it worked and never did because it's philotics. So Jane may be rooted in Ender, and sure, cut off all her arms and legs and leave a small bit of her alive with Ender. Whose to say that she'll even be sentient and able to get back to her full potential. The fact is, two auias can't have one body, that was already depicted when Jane finally did get the boot. You can move about and touch different points, but you can't linger for long.
As for number 3, I don't see a problem. In Xenocide, she can only do limited transportation. Then she has 30 years to learn how to do more. Maybe she found out how to possess a starship using the ansible and onboard computers. It seems to me that all she really needs a way to link to it. It was origionally theoried that the twining was what allowed her to picture it so well. Perhaps she can twine with the ship. Need we reflect the discussion between Val, Jakt, Miro, and Jane about the relationship between a human and their shoe? Then the thing about her moving herself makes sense. Before, her "self" was always a network of computer such that she never went to the outside space. Then her "self" became Val and it was her first trip going out. Before it was more like watching the trip through a camera.
But you go ahead and keep on being irritating. I mean irritated.*
Posts: 54 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, old thread but I don't recall seeing it before. Anyway, after reading through it now, I don't think that anything mentioned here is actually an inconsistency so much as plot and character development.
But Josh, There's not 30 years between X and CotM. More like a few weeks.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Josh Cooper: What a joke. You find these to be irritating? You probably wouldn't even have noticed them if someone else hadn't pointed them out. You should be irritated at EpicanthicFold87, not an imperfect author...
Well, not to burst your bubble, but I was searching for a thread like this because, in fact, I HAD noticed and I wanted to see if there was already a thread. The change is really glaringly obvious and frankly distracting if you read the two books back-to-back as I am doing (Ender In Exile inspired me to go back and read these again).
Anyways, it's not a huge deal but like I said I do find it distracting and I am taken out of CotM a little bit every time someone refers to how Jane is going to die. And while people talk about Jane-being-in-Ender from Xenocide being "speculation" on the part of the characters, well that's hogwash. It may be in a way, but it is presented as being True and there is no reason to doubt it. I imagine OSC realized it made it harder to write CotM or the book was simply less interesting, but in that case it would have been easy enough to have a mere sentence saying "well guys, turns out no part of Jane's auia is in Ender after all!"
The other problem with this, of course, is that because they had figured out FTL and knew Jane would not die in Xenocide, Ender could decide to join Novinha since he had basically taken care of all the major problems. But that is no longer the case in CotM.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Anyways, it's not a huge deal but like I said I do find it distracting and I am taken out of CotM a little bit every time someone refers to how Jane is going to die. And while people talk about Jane-being-in-Ender from Xenocide being "speculation" on the part of the characters, well that's hogwash. It may be in a way, but it is presented as being True and there is no reason to doubt it. I imagine OSC realized it made it harder to write CotM or the book was simply less interesting, but in that case it would have been easy enough to have a mere sentence saying "well guys, turns out no part of Jane's auia is in Ender after all!"
The other problem with this, of course, is that because they had figured out FTL and knew Jane would not die in Xenocide, Ender could decide to join Novinha since he had basically taken care of all the major problems. But that is no longer the case in CotM.
I still don't see any inconsistencies, and believe me, I've been known to spot one or two myself. The characters know in CotM that Jane will survive in some from or another. If I recall correctly someone (Peter?) even corrects Jane (I think) by saying something like, "You won't die, you'll just get really stupid for a while". They still know that she has an auia that won't be destroyed, but for all intents and purposes Jane will be dead, since her personality and abilities are as connected to the ansibles as ours are to our physical brains. They know she won't be Jane anymore unless she has access to the ansibles/computers, or some other "body" with comparable information storage capabilities. Or, at very least, a human body in which to house her personality if not her superhuman abilities.
Jane's auia being in Ender wasn't even what they speculated, as far as I remember. The theory was that they were closely connected since the whole purpose of Jane's auia was to be bridge between Ender's and the Hive Queens. What was speculated was that Ender being present during the first trip Outside would make it more likely to succeed because the link between him and Jane would provide something of an anchor to make maintaining the surrounding patterns easier hor her. Whether this is true or not (which no one ever claims to be certain of), it became a moot point with the creation of other bodies that housed Ender's auia (ie. Peter and Valentine), whom are almost always among the passengers when Jane makes a trip. The times when they are not present are easily explained by Jane getting better at the task. She doesn't need training wheels anymore, if she ever actually needed them at all. By the end, she doesn't even need a "ship" in which to encase the passengers.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm going to restart with Speaker for the Dead and when I finish Children of the Mind, I'll come back and post on this again. However, the fact that you find these and they seem to blare like trumpets while you're reading suggests that it is a huge deal. You did find it irresistible to post about your great suffering. Either that, or you just like to look for these supposed inconsistencies and point them out.
Posts: 54 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: I still don't see any inconsistencies, and believe me, I've been known to spot one or two myself. The characters know in CotM that Jane will survive in some from or another. If I recall correctly someone (Peter?) even corrects Jane (I think) by saying something like, "You won't die, you'll just get really stupid for a while". ...
There's an exchange at the end of Xenocide, when Peter arrives on Path before he leaves with Wang-Mu, where he says that (and I'm paraphrasing) "Jane will become semi-stupid for awhile, but die she will not." If there is a similar such exchange in CotM it's a ways into the book, after various characters have talked extensively about how Jane will die. What you said in your post is certainly true, but even so Jane's situation loses some urgency when it seems she won't die.
As for Josh, I have no idea why you're taking my posts so personally. I'm as big a fan of OSC as the next person on Hatrack, maybe even moreso, and no I don't enjoy looking for inconsistencies, nor am I suffering greatly. I just happen to find this particular issue in the book annoying/distracting and I thought I'd enter the discussion on it. So can we please relax?
Posts: 326 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: I still don't see any inconsistencies, and believe me, I've been known to spot one or two myself. The characters know in CotM that Jane will survive in some from or another. If I recall correctly someone (Peter?) even corrects Jane (I think) by saying something like, "You won't die, you'll just get really stupid for a while". ...
There's an exchange at the end of Xenocide, when Peter arrives on Path before he leaves with Wang-Mu, where he says that (and I'm paraphrasing) "Jane will become semi-stupid for awhile, but die she will not." If there is a similar such exchange in CotM it's a ways into the book, after various characters have talked extensively about how Jane will die. What you said in your post is certainly true, but even so Jane's situation loses some urgency when it seems she won't die.
Hm... That might actually be the conversation that I was thinking of, but I'm pretty sure it comes up in CotM too.
Posts: 1569 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by neo-dragon: I still don't see any inconsistencies, and believe me, I've been known to spot one or two myself. The characters know in CotM that Jane will survive in some from or another. If I recall correctly someone (Peter?) even corrects Jane (I think) by saying something like, "You won't die, you'll just get really stupid for a while". ...
There's an exchange at the end of Xenocide, when Peter arrives on Path before he leaves with Wang-Mu, where he says that (and I'm paraphrasing) "Jane will become semi-stupid for awhile, but die she will not." If there is a similar such exchange in CotM it's a ways into the book, after various characters have talked extensively about how Jane will die. What you said in your post is certainly true, but even so Jane's situation loses some urgency when it seems she won't die.
As for Josh, I have no idea why you're taking my posts so personally. I'm as big a fan of OSC as the next person on Hatrack, maybe even moreso, and no I don't enjoy looking for inconsistencies, nor am I suffering greatly. I just happen to find this particular issue in the book annoying/distracting and I thought I'd enter the discussion on it. So can we please relax?
I just get tired of seeing people pointing out stuff that's wrong or inaccurate. Then you are going to say that you're irritated? Well now you know what irritates ME. Especially when they're half-baked stuff that is only true if you interpret it all in one narrow way. The way I look at it, if there's something SO contrary in another book, then the new book is how the story goes and overwrites what was in the old one. By the way, if you get annoyed by inconsistencies, don't ever read the Bible.
Posts: 54 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't tell me it's wrong or inaccurate when you haven't read the books recently. Even OSC, posting above, didn't deny that it was contradictory, he just said he changed his mind. Basically his way of saying "get over it." That's fine, I'm over it and enjoying the book. I just wish he didn't change his mind.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Cool. Then let me point out how in my copy of Ender's Game, at least, the line "Everyone learned the wrong lesson from Bonzo's misuse of Ender." Except it was Rose the Nose that sent him through the gate immediately, showing how devastating such an attack could be. Ooh, a mistake!
Actually that doesn't really bother me. But the "where is Jane's auia" does. In all of Card's work, which I've reread many times, that stands out as the one thing that really bothers me. He just changed his mind but didn't put a justification for it in the story. It really detracts from my enjoyment; it breaks my suspension of disbelief.
Posts: 454 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well it really depends on what you define to be recent. I have read all three of them within the last year. I can understand that to a 12 year old, a year is a very long time so it might no be all that recent to you. I'm only rereading them now because after discussion, it gives me new perspective and something to watch for. Card's line above wasn't really a reply. It looks like something he just wrote because he didn't really read the whole post with his full attention. That's what single line posts usually suggest to me. One thing you should note is that origionally, Xenocide and Children of the Mind were going to be one book. Card was trying to write a book combining his Philotes project with the Enderverse. After realizing that Xenocide would have been a three hundred thousand word book, he decided to break it into two books. Given that, how much could the two differ? As for the line about Bonzo's misuse of Ender, I never noticed that, but I really don't mind you saying it. You're not saying it for the purpose of complaining about the book.
Posts: 54 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Real classy about the 12-year old Josh, that's good, though something tells me you aren't trying to be ironic.
I realize that the books were originally meant to be one but then it did take an additional 5 years to crank CotM out, so it seems likely the original plan was not necessarily followed.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
A beam for combat in space amongst ships; a missle for larger scale attacks. (moons, etc.)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
