posted
I finished this book today and it's definitely up there with Card's best work. Exciting, thought-provoking, and scarily realistic. I'm looking forward to the sequel.
Posts: 326 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
the first five chapters began the book and the ones I didn't read ended it. I stopped reading at least several chapters after I begun but once I made the purchase I'd already done all my reading online of the material
soo.. the riddle is...
How many chapters have I read?
Posts: 38 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My "problem" is that I always just read books as books...and did it entertain me? Was I addicted, intrigued, hooked? Yep. I bought Empire yesterday at around 5 PM and finished it before going to sleep (even stopped for dinner!). I loved that it was so up-to-the-minute...maybe because I live in Leesburg, so the local references made me giggle. (Kept saying to my husband, "Hey! They're crossing at Point of Rocks again! Wonder if they remembered to turn off their headlights???")
I am sometimes aggrieved that all political viewpoints in fiction I admire aren't mine. I do wonder how different my universities were (both under- and post- graduate), that the English department persistently focused on poetry instead of politics -- I could never tell how my professors voted, although I knew they knew way more about Yeats than I could comprehend at 20. Or 25. Or now, for that matter. I
Ånd yet I am a reader who is always in awe of STORY. If a story sweeps me along, I'll let anything happen and retrofit it later. (For example, after reading, I think walking "mechs" and hoverbikes are a great idea for scaring the crap out of a population that grew up on Star Wars. Who cares if they're not practical? You're not using them against a real enemy, one you want to kill...you're using them to scare fellow Americans, who are going to have immediate reactions to seeing pop culture nightmares become reality.) I don't think this stuff while reading -- hey, this makes sense for Card to do because.... I'm just like, ACK! How are they going to make it out alive??
So thank you, Mr. Card, for that reading experience that is WHY I READ. There are plenty of books that don't suck me in, so I truly appreciate those that do.
And if in addition it makes me double-check my knee-jerk reactions to today's politics, and makes me remember to respect and maybe even love those whose opinions I really really think are wrong wrong wrong -- then it's literature.
posted
empire comes from the greek work afgaristo meaning thank you as in thank you for ridding my country of it's culture and identity.. only in this novel [one which I have yet to read] Orson describes a self forming empire through the collapse of a republic... like a collapsible sofa bed..
HEY LOOK MOM IT CHANGES FROM A REPUBLIC TO AN EMPIRE IN ONE MOVE
okay so here's the big question... if a sofa bed can turn back into a sofa when you're done sleeping on it... why can't an empire revert into a republic if we so desire ENJOY MY LIFE CAUSE I WILL!
<Removed profanity. Please don't do it again. --PJ>
[ December 29, 2006, 12:55 AM: Message edited by: Papa Janitor ]
Posts: 38 | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm going to say right out that I've read a little over half the book - I've gotten far enough for George Soros' compound to materialize, for Rube to die and for Torrent to reappear as the obvious mastermind/conciliator.
I'm not sure if I'm going to finish it, and here's why: stereotypes.
The book is chock full of them. Usually Mr. Card (Scott? OSC? How do you refer to an author on his own website, especially when you know he's been following this thread? The generic "you"?) is a phenomenal character artist, which is why I fell in love with Ender and Bean and even Bonzo Madrid. But the character in this book feel like the very extreme stereotypes the book (and Mr. Card) purport to disdain. (In Empire, Rube was the one exception to the general bland characters, but only because of the book's very first scene. By the end, he'd lost me.)
The two I'm most qualified to discuss are the media and the military (strange, neh, to find someone sympathetic to both of those "sides" of this civil war?). While I enjoyed the descriptions of how TV interviews play, I was frustrated by what I view as an ignorant portrayal of an insular, elitist media, evil regardless of which "side" a particular network was on. Also, it's a complete misperception to think of the "media" as this giant, unified front controlling information, something to be universally disdained and scorned because it has a certain agenda.
Working in the media has shown me this is universally not the case. Reporters are individuals, and each works differently. News organizations are far from uniform, and each works differently. Some are more unified and directed than others because the management approach is more top-down; others are more a collection of dissonant voices unified only by a common cover, front page or brand name. Media organizations don't want anything, except to beat the other guy and have information flow more freely. They are not out to "get" the military or bring down the U.S. I promise they do not harbor any secret nefarious plans, plots or even motives.
Second, the military. The idea that there would be officers, however high ranking, willing to foment or even talk about fomenting a right-wing coup is completely ludicrous and only plays into the stereotypes harbored only by people unfamiliar with the military. Most of the officers or soon-to-be officers I know would be offended at the suggestion, as would the enlisted personnel, no matter how they vote.
Also, there's just no way that Reuben and Coleman would talk to each other the way they did. Special forces guys can be exceptions, yes, but protocol and hierarchy mean more than anything to military guys because their lives depend on it. The differentiation between enlisted and officer isn't some weird system of classist oppression, as many with little military exposure would assert, it's a mechanism to keep people safely distanced so as to facilitate sound decision making and quick response. Someone with as much field experience as Reuben Malich would know that and adhere to it, regardless of "instinct" upon first meeting.
And third, the stereotypes of the American people, on both sides of the aisle. Frankly, the country is still far more middle of the road than this book suggests. Democrats were angry about the 2000 elections, yes, but not angry enough to stage a civil war! They might talk about infringement on their civil liberties, and they may not like it...but they're not willing to kill their neighbors over it! The idea that all "liberals" and all "conservatives" are unified is a false paradigm, and it smacks of a Washington-centric, polarized viewpoint promulgated not by newspapers but by ideological columnist and bloggers. Regular people on regular American streets vote all kinds of ways for all kinds of different reasons. One of my family members is a staunch pro-choice Democrat who is very much against the Iraq war. In the same election, she voted against George Bush and for Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, because of his strong stance on stem cells and his general moderation (even though she agreed with his Democratic opponent on other issues, such as Iraq).
Frankly, this last election shows just how purple America is. Hundreds of thousands of Americans who voted for George Bush in 2000 or 2004 voted for a Democrat for Congress. It just shows that we still are the nation of pragmatists, not ideologues, and that we pay attention to what our leaders do, not what party they belong to.
I felt like these stereotypes permeated the language and plot of the book, misinforming characters' actions and creating irritating passages that made me want to roll my eyes and slam the book shut. I'm sure it will make a great video game, and that's probably why it was such a disappointing book.
Posts: 1784 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to say that Reuben and Coleman didn't strike me as seasoned killers. Particularly their insistence on engaging in "banter" during combat situations. "Banter" is how intellectuals (of every stripe) comfort themselves when placed in a situation that is beyond their control, it isn't how professionals communicate critical tactical information to each other. But hey, Card's a writer, I can forgive him for something like that.
As for Democrats not being willing to kill their neighbors over politics...you're living in a fantasy world. Or, which is more probable, you're simply lying
I'm intrigued by the idea of a sequel based on Nick (or whoever) trying to avenge his father's death. But I have to echo the question, "who said there was going to be a sequel?"
Posts: 763 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am half-way through Empire - at the chapter just after Ruben's death - and am nervously eyeing the last half of it. Have loved some of it and less than loved some of it, so... we'll see.
My first disappointment was, I admit, typos - I'm a technical writing major hoping to become an editor; of course I noticed the typos. And yes, every book has them, as well as grammatical errors... but I noticed more of them in the first few chapters of Empire than I have ever noticed in another of OSC's books. Though I admit that, having looked up 'cooky' to see whether it was a word and finding that it is, in fact, a valid altnerative for 'cookie', there are fewer errors than I thought.
Despite the typos, I was completely pulled into the world of Empire; I adored Ruben, was more happy with Cessy when she wasn't speaking from her own viewpoint, and loved Nick. I liked Cole, but as a secondary character. The political and historical thought was intriuging, and I think the only point Card really 'lost' me on was the sudden introduction of the mechs - and even then, after I just accepted them as the technology he wanted to use, they worked - mostly.
However, I literally dropped the book when Ruben was killed, and I... am still feeling iffy about picking it up again. Granted, they're different characters, but abruptly killing Ruben felt like abruptly killing *Ender*; removing the character I cared about most, without a hint of warning beyond Cessy and Rube's conversation about who they trusted, disconnected me from the story.
Torrent is, of course, the one behind everything; I knew this from the moment the words "wanted Ruben's soul" are used to describe him during Rube's time at Princeton. That's a pretty strong trigger phrase to "This is the bad guy, watch out!"
*sigh* Of course I have to finish reading it. It's a Card novel. But so far, it isn't going to be my favorite.
Posts: 7 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Omega M.: I wanted more discussion of how Americans got to hating each other enough to fight.
You're one of the international internet users? Or just very young? I think for anybody who lives here and is politically aware of what his/her neighbors are saying, it's pretty obvious. I remember one who shocked me: on my Anglican (Episcopalian) e-mail List, one voluminous poster who had sounded very Christian before that went ballistic some time _before_ the 2000 election, and when it wound up in the Florida mess as is did, then to the Supreme Court, got progressively more violent in his language. He couldn't even post "praying" in response to a Prayer Request without the violence in his sig line. I fully expected to hear that he'd been picked up for trying to take a shot at President Bush, or had died of apoplexy. I don't know whether he's ever calmed down: he dropped off the List some time early in 2001.
Take a look at the television pictures of the anti-war protests now: I get the distinct impression that some of those people wouldn't want to shoot Al Quaeda members, but wouldn't have a problem with shooting Republicans.
Posts: 69 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
One minor error, the Army generally frowns on people wearing fatigues around town so it wasn't realistic for Malich and Coleman to put them on to go visit ground zero.
They had very limited wardrobes of clean clothes available (remember how they left Washington?), and had gotten up very early--didn't want to wear sunday-go-to-meetin' clothes on a 5AM quick ride into town.
Maybe I didn't notice an incongruity there, because I used to do volunteer work (secretarial) in my church on Saturdays, and was used to the Rector dropping in to the parish office in fatigues, before/after his National Guard meeting, just to check on how things were going or to attend to some detail before going home for the day.
Posts: 69 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I just started reading Empire, and I'm kicking myself for not pointing out the shift from Farsi to Arabic in Malich's notes when we had the first five chapters up. Maybe it used to say Arabic both places. Still, probably just a typo level error.
Maybe somebody else pointed it out, because Cessy covered it later when she was translating the class notes, that it wasn't really straight "college language class" Farsi, but a sort of amalgam of Farsi, Arabic, English, Spanish, and maybe "other" that Reuben's jeesh had evolved as a sort of private language.
Posts: 69 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
