Week Eleven
Post 24
Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale raised many questions. One question for
example is where did she get the idea for Gilead? She made Gilead by
comparing it to some of the governments we have today. When you compare
Gilead to Russia you see some similarities. First, Russia is contiually
taking steps to become more democratic but they still use the Secret Police.
The people are not allowed to speak freely because they fear the repercussions
the Secret Police might take. The government in Gilead think they are
creating a wonderful new way of life but still hang on to the belief that the
people should fear the government instead of embracing it. --T Aaron
Response to Post 22
Response to post 22: In Misty's post about Startide Rising she talked about the relationship that Brin made up between Sahot and Dennie. She added how she just couldn't see how any human could be attracted to a dolphin, or in the same manner how and dolphin could be attracted to a human. Well, the way I saw it was that Brin was trying to show us how the world has changed and that anything was possible. I doubt that Brin was just trying to "have a little romance." He just wanted to show what just might happen in the future to the human race. --Ryan Monahan
Reponse to Post 10
Response to post 10: In this post Jason said how much he enjoyed the break from the first part of the book to the second part of the book, The Gods Themselves. He went on how much it made him want to read more. I can't believe this!!!! When I first read this book I had to put the damn thing down after the break because it was SO disappointing! I was so mad that the whole book completely changed and I couldn't believe it. I couldn't even start reading again for a couple of days. I read through the break once and absolutely hated it, but once I read through it a second time I guess it was alright, but not "very interesting" as Jason said. --Ryan Monahan
Response to Post 14
In response to your post 14 on The Gods Themselves, I think that you were right on. That quote that you pointed out on page 292 is essential. I agree that Asimov was doing what he felt was correct with the ending. The ending therefore wasnt really an ending. It was the point at which the crisis, that was introduced at the beginning of the novel, ended. I also agree that it was perhaps more realistic than an dramatic ending he could have included. One must acknowledge that because the ending didnt find any dramatic conclusion, that Asimov then suggests, as provided on page 292 that there will never be one ending. Even if the human universe in Asimovs novel did explode it would not the novels end. This may be a more dramatic way in which tIo finish the novel, but it would still be merely a crisis point pass ed because the para-universe would still exist and thrive. If there were no humans left one might assert that a story could no longer be told, but that doesnt negate the notion that the time would not stop. Things or events would still happen, or even the lack of events happening as in Cages music of the 50s could be seen as a sort of story. As long as there is anything or even nothing I feel that Asimov's idea of the passing of crisis works. The only way I can see that it wouldnt work is if there were always nothing, but this becomes non-point because Asimovs novel is about something. I dont know how much sense that made to you, but I assure you that I found you post made a lot of sense to me. I found it very insightful, Thanks. --Joshua Primm
Post 25
One of the things that most surprised me about the first third of Ender's Game is the ages of the characters. On page 44, Ender says that he will be old by the time he sees his family again, at least twelve. It is hard to imagine that Ender is only six years old when he is sent to become a commander. On page 36, Graff and Anderson are discussing Ender. Anderson says "We're going to make him the best military commander in history". We must keep in mind that these "future commanders" are only children, most of them aren't even teenagers yet. I wonder why Orson Scott Card chose to have children as his main characters. I think it adds a lot to the story and makes it all the more interesting to read. Most of these children do not act at all like children but instead they act like young adults entering war for their first time. It seems to me like the adults in the story are trying to make these children grow up and do the job that the adults should be doing. One comment that caught me off guard was on page 66, "He'll (Ender) have a month or two, maybe three, with his launch group. That's really quite a long time in a child's life" "Does it ever seem to you that these boys aren't children? I look at what they do, the way they talk, and they don't seem like little kids."
The adults seem to have a small understanding of what these children are going through but not a big enough understanding to do anything about it. If this were really to happen in the future, do you think the government would use children geniuses to help save the world? Or would the adults of the world step up and help? --Jennifer Hakes
Post 26
On page 44, "Dap came to the door that night and moved quietly among the beds, touching a hand here, a forehead there. Where he went there was more crying, not less. The touch of kindness in this frightening place ws enough to push some over the edge into tears. Not Ender, though." This quote is a vivid reminder of the fact that the soldiers in this book are 6 to 14 year olds. This isn't regarded by the society as wrong or cruel, either. Peter was upset that he wasn't chosen, and his brother Ender was. In fact, the only reason that Ender was born was because the government, in its search for the perfect soldier, found that Peter was too cruel, and Valentine was too soft. It was hoped that a third child would blend both qualities. The government probably want soldiers that are children because of the adaptibility of children. You can teach children, especially bright ones, virtually anything. They are dealing with complex equipment in a situation without gravity - children can learn to work around these ideas. Card seems to be commenting on many of the wars in recent memory. All of them could be condemned because young men died in old mens' wars. --Jennie Cisna
Post 27
In the opening chapter of Ender's Game, Ender, more or less defending his integrity, throttles Stilson. Stilson drops. At this point, Card, using mere children as his tool of illustration, brings to light a brutal truth: "unwritten rules" of warfare transcend every day main-stream decency. Our vantage point as insulated peace-time civilians does not always facilitate a full view of the ghoulish complexities of war. When Stilson hits the ground, social(?) etiquette might dictate that Ender, having struck a decisive blow, show restraint (to avoid, as the book says, behaving like an "animal.") But, as Card writes, "Ender knew the unspoken rules of manly warfare, even though he was only six." Ender continued to pummel Stilson. He had to win at that point, or, "fight it every day" (7). A fitting, albeit far more complex, parallel to this would be the military philosophy of the Israelis. Like Ender, they have a history of being menaced and tormented. Now that they have an established nation which is geographically surrounded by potentially hostile neighbors, they too have found that they must act decisively against any agression. The fact that Israel still exists after 50 years bolsters a strong case for the effectiveness of this philosophy of preservation. --Erick Hubbard
Response to Post 19
In response to post 19, humans do interfere in a range of ways with other species. A good example is found in the way people manipulate the "persona" of animals. Take, for instance, rabbits. Bunnies are usually portrayed as cuddly, fluffy creatures that lay eggs at Easter time and show up on posters with cute sayings at the bottom. Not very realistic, but I suppose there's nothing wrong with this. Bunnies are ok with most people. However, conversely, I once saw this image transposed (again, by humans) in a drawing on a box of shotgun shells; not just any shells, but rabbit and squirrel load. The artist drew not a bunny of the egg laying variety, but one leaping in mid-air with a foul tempered look on it's face, bearing long claws (a-la-South Park "It's coming right at us."). Ah yes, an evil looking hare that any decent hunter would be justified in putting out of it's crazed misery. --Erick Hubbard
Post 28
"I found out why people laugh. They laugh because it hurts...because it's the only thing that'll make it stp hurting." -Valentine Michael Smith Okay, so call me a few weeks behind, but what Robert A. Heilein suggests here is actually one of the main philosophical reasons for why humans laugh. What preceeds in this chapter is that Jill and Mike are at the zoo, and Michael sees a monkey beat up a smaller monkey, so then the hurt monkey goes over and gives another monkey, even small, a good licking. Mike bursts out in laughter. Every joke I can think of is either making fun of someone's pain, of the ignorance of one person or another. Irony, a very misunderstood art, is perhaps best understood as laughing at your own stupidity for not knowing what would happen. Humans laugh to make themselves feel better. It is the best defensive mechanism. Later, when Michael has developed the Inner Circle, it is noted that nobody laughed. Perhaps this is because they no longer hurt after learning the "discipline." --Chris Wood
Response to Post 4
Response to post 4: I read the post about how Stranger misrepresented women. Besides the fact that this novel was written before the free love movement or the most resent feminist movements, I still don't see these women as the week thing that are suggested. First off, it is implied that most women would not take the job of Jubal's secretary. He's an old cynical man who wants an old school family, where he is the father and his daughters do whatr he says. In return, they get great pay, and a garenteed home for life. It isn't a working situation, but a family. The same could be said for the guys who worked for Jubal. They are all the spoiled sons, who follow the father's every wish. Most people probably wouldn't want that at all, but these folks did. Second, and probably last, all of the "liberating" experiences of the women are described by the women. It isn't like Mike is sitting on a couch in a wife-beater saying, "Mmm.. I like to see my women strut it." The women are discribing what they get out of the it, and that they are in fact using the males who admire them i.e. Jill on the run way, and Miriam who trains Muhammad more than he trains her. Of couse, I could be completely wrong here. --Chris Wood
Post 29
I am writing this post in response to the book we are reading by Orson Scott Card called Ender's Game. On page 22 of the book Colonel Graff comes to Ender to tell him that he has been selected and he can come with him if he chooses. His parents made the decision when he was born. Ender wa told that no one wanted a "third" anymore and it was unheard of having a large family. His father had come from a family of nine which was absurd. I am from a family of seven and I believe just what Orson Scott Card is saying in the book that in the future the government with tell people how many children they can and can't have. --Ryan Monahan
Post 30
In the beginning of the book, "Ender's Game" Graff is talking to Ender about coming with him to battle school. Ender replies, "It's what I was born for, isn't it? If I don't go, why am I alive? This is just one of the many quotes where Ender shows his keen intelligence to the reader. Obviously the children of the Wiggin family are geniuses. Yet, it seems as though most of the children in battle school are unusually smart. I was wondering why Card chose to make children the main characters in a novel that is solely about war? Was he trying to show the importance of children and their abilities, or as a father of five is he just extremely well as showing children's emotion? I find it extremely interesting that Peter and Valentine are writing on the internet and have a following of people who agree or disagree with them. Any one of the people would never believe that a child is writing these columns. I just found that the use of children in Card's novel adds both entertaining and sympathetic aspects to the novel. Overall, I throughly enjoy having children be the main characters!!!! --Misty Dillow
Response to Post 23
In response to Caroline' Post (Post 23), I also had difficulty with Startide Rising. I agree that I found it frustrating to know the names of all the characters, to read the short chapters, and to understand the little action that took place. But, I believe that this is a novel that probably cannot be judged on the first reading. If I were to read the book again, I believe that I would understand more of it and probably like the book much more. I also think that if I had more time to read the book I could have read it more carefully, which also would have added to my enjoyment!!! --Misty Dillow
Response to Post 22
Misty Dillow commented on the crush that Sahot had on Dennie in Startide Rising. I agree that Brin was attempting to make the relationships interesting in the book. I also think that it may be a comment on current race relations. In typical Galactic tradition, the dolphins were supposed to have been slaves of humans - much like African-Americans were in America. Brin may have been trying to comment that the Dolphins had "normal human" feelings just like African-Americans.
He may also have been making note of the interspecies relationships familiar to any researcher who works with "intelligent" species.
--Jennie Cisna
Post 31
Forgetting and remembrance of the Family in Ender's Game
"Hey, I know, nobody's supposed to take about home. But we came from somewhere. The Battle School didn't create us, you know. The Battle School didn't create anything. It just destroys. And all we remember are things from home. Maybey not good things, but we rember and then we lie and pretend that--look, Ender, why is it that nobody talks about home, ever? Doesn't that tell you how important it is? That nobody even admits that--oh Hell." (109)
I thought that this passage from Ender's Game is really essential to a lot of thing that are going on in the book. This passage is spoken by Dink, buy it also reflects what Ender thinks also. Literately the passage is about it is forbidden to talk about your family while you are in Battle School. But think the message of this part goes much further. I think the whole notion of the governing forces of the battle school telling the children not to talk about their families and past is reflective of the way that card sets up the political environment of Ender's Game. I guess the best way I relate this is that while Ender was still at home Card told the reader that the place in which Ender's family lived was abnormal to be religious. Catholics and Mormons were looked down upon. I got the impression that any religion was really looked down upon. For this reason Ender's parents gave up their religious views so that they could be normal. In this was I think that his family was also sort of told by the government or social forces around them to forget their families and their past, in so far as religion went. At least for Ender's father it was the embarrassment that went along with being from a large family. The father didn't want his child to go through the same things that he did, and so the father decided to play the game the politician wanted it. He would have the number of children the government told him to, and dump his religion and family by the way side. I think that he can really relate to Ender not only as a child of an unusually large size, but as having to forget his past in order to play the governments game. However his father did rebel by having him baptized, and Ender is rebelling right now by talking about his Family with Dink.
While the Battle School doesn't forbid you to remember home, the Battle Schools Mom in the first part of the novel instructed the boys to forget not mention their home. I think that this was to keep them from being distracted from thinking about it, but at the same time I think that for Ender it is the only thing that keeps him going. I feel that because Ender does remember his family particularly his sister, Valentine, he feel he needs to save them from the aliens. This fear that he will lose his family to the aliens is what keeps him fighting and trying so hard. This is reflected in this passage as it goes on. However Ender tries hard for his family, but for Dink the fact that wont let them talk about their families causes him to distrust the battle Schools intentions as it does many of the upper class. I think that this issue of the government trying to make people forget their past or families because they see it as prudent is just starting to unweave, and that maybe Ender will be forced to deal more and more with issue. I believe that this issue will translate, has for Dink and so many of the Battle School's Upper classmen, into What is Ender fighting for? And who can he trust. Ender made the choice to leave his family for them, and I think that is what Ender will cling to.--Josh Primm
Response to Post 12
Dear Misty, I thought that you had some great points in post 12. I think you are right in saying that Mallam should not have gotten the credit for the pump in The Gods Themselves. However I think that through this struggle over who is the true founder of the pump Asimov is making a point that in a larger scale the scientific community works in much the same way. Since science began there scientists have been gaining a general knowledge base, and while a great number of things are attributed to specific persons it seems to me that every invention belongs to all scientists that have come before. For instance the Wright brothers are attributed with the first airplane, but before them Leonardo Da Vinci was dealing with the mechanics of fight. All though Lenorado Da Vinci's designs may have been way off, I think he deserves some recognition for even trying. I think that Asimov's point is that scientist have been ripping each other off for as long as there has been scientists. I don't think that he saying that it should stop, but rather that people should stop taking credit for anything. Every thing in the world was spawned from something else. The argument that Asimov brings up is something that will continue on for ever. Also it wasn't Denison at all who was responsible for the pump in fact it wasn't even a human, it was the aliens from the other universe who actually sent humans the plans for the thing in the first place. I think as a scientist himself, that Asimov was bringing into question the very notion that anyone can be credited with any discovery because science is world that is supposed to share all information. If credit to the invention of any one invention it should list every scientist that has added anything to sciences general knowledge base at all. I too thought it was a shame that Denison did not get credit, but I don't even think that he was the pump's true creator. Misty I think you found a great part of the novel to talk about, I just think that there was more to it. And who knows maybe I'm full of it. We'd have to ask the author, but I guess he's dead so we'll never really know. --Joshua Primm
Post 32
Free Will in Ender's Game as explained by Valentine
"'I know what you're thinking, Ender. You're thinking that I'm trying to control you just as much as Peter or Graff or any of the others."
"It crossed my mind."
"Welcome to the human race. Nobody controls his own life, Ender. The best you can do is choose to fill the roles given you by good people, by people who love you..."' (313)
I thought that this quote from Ender's Game summed up a lot about the book, and what the author seems to think about life in general. Ender has had to make a lot of decisions in the novel. He has had to choose to go to battle school in the first place, at Battle school he made a lot of differing choices about the Game, he had to choose how to defeat the Buggers in the end, he had to choose to become a colonist, and he had to choose to try and find a place for the Bugger cocoon. However, all of these choices that Ender made were done for people or Buggers and within a structure that people had given him. At battle school Ender had to make choices that fit within the perimeter of the rules set out for him. The best example I can think of are the mock battles. In the mock battles at the school Ender had perimeters or rules set up for him, and he had to choose to what he should do with his troops to win. In this instance the person
who loved him was Graff and he was the one who laid down the rules. When Ender chose to go to battle school in the first place it was love for Valentine that drove him to go, so that he could save her and the rest of the human race from the Buggers. I then end it was love for this sister and the choice of going with her or not that made him chose to become a colonist. Also Graff said that it was Ender's love or empathy for the Buggers that allowed him to defeat them, but it was also Ender's empathy for the Buggers that made him write as the Speaker for the Dead and take the Bugger Queen's egg.
I think that Card really captured some the major elements that not only drove Ender in the novel, but also what element free will plays in today's society. I also think that this quote over simplifies it. I think Card is right in some respects. I think this quote really captures the idea that we all live within some sort of system and infrastructure, and that we have choices within that structure. For example here within the United States we have Both democracy and capitalism. When we were growing up we were told that we have to go to school. Now we have the choice within the school setting of weather or not to do our homework, but for the most part we do our home work because our parents and teachers ( who supposedly care for us) say it is best for us. Most us at the college level, I assume, then made choices based on that sort of caring to do our homework. However, it was still a choice, but it was also set up or given to us by people who care for us. All of us also choose to go to college because our parents or someone who cared for our well being told us it would be good for us. I think that Card has had it right in his quote thus far, but I also think that other things drive us. Maybe we went to college simply for the notion that we could make more money, and I don't think that too many of us will dispute that that was part of the choice you made in deciding to go to college. There are other things that factor in as well, such as: pride, greed, a need for food, water, housing, and maybe the idea that in long hall you can make a difference to the world. I think that Card addressed a great deal of why Ender made the choices he did in this quote, but I think that he is also trying to tackle the notion of free will in a very simplistic way that only works on a very superficial level, and within the context of the book. I think the quote works well for the novel, and maybe that's all it is supposed to address. However I think that he might explore the subject more in this section. I think that Ender sort of takes his sister's advice at face value, which doesn't seem to be like Ender at all. However, it does address the notion that Ender sort of got shafted, he has been used by people without them really giving him too much choice. I think that his sister is trying to make him feel better, and maybe this why Ender didn't question her. I don't know, the quote really addresses Ender's sort of crisis of being used, and his sister points out that he's not the only one. But it also leaves something to be desired as it addresses free will. However I think that any explanation of free will leave something to be desired, and maybe that is why card leaves it at what he did.
--Joshua Primm
Post 33
In the novel Ender's Game, Ender realizes that the enemy is his teachers.
The authority figures in the novel that Ender must have contact with push him
to achieve his best, but by doing this, he is always unhappy. Thus enters the
controversy about saving the world in exchange for one little boy's happiness.
Ender was bred to perform the duty of commanding the fleet for the invasion of
the 'buggers'. But through the emotional struggle that the reader discovers
that Ender must face, the good of the many at some times seemed unimportant
because of the tremendous emotional struggle that Ender had to withstand.
From the fights that were not controlled or prevented to the physical injury
that the stress of battle caused, the government pushed Ender until he
performed successfully. Genetic engineering obviously played a part in
Ender's intelligence but is it moral that the government use this
intelligence, only asking permission from him at six years old, knowing that
he did not understand the implications of what he was about to do. Even
though Ender was bred to do this kind of grueling work, is it moral to use him
as a tool, like the government did in this novel?
--Deidra Dame
[Index][Week1/5]
[Week6]
[Week7]
[Week8]
[Week9]
[Week10]
[Week11]
