Week 13, E221 Sci-Fi
Post 37
The queen of the buggers telepathically asks Ender to help her children be reborn. Ender says, "No, I can't . . .Your children are the monsters of our nightmares now. If I awoke you, we would only kill you again." (320) I found this to be a very moving passage in the story. The war had started between the Buggers and the humans only because the two races had two very radically different ways of communicating - the Buggers were united into one cohesive group while the humans depended on the style of communication that we are all familiar with.
One the Buggers had discovered that the humans were a sentient race, they were trying to stop the war. However, the humans would not just let it rest; we hunted them down and destroyed them. The humans in the novel had made the Buggers a controlling nightmare for society. They had based their military system on it, their system of government - practically everything. The Buggers so dominated the humans fears that it allowed them to commit genocide on a race that, now, meant no harm. This seems to be a comment on some of our national obsessions. The Cold War is over now (but it wasn't when this story was first written). Although we never tried to destroy the Soviets, we were constantly fearful that it might come to that. We made the Soviets into our children's nightmares, and it came as a shock to find that they weren't really all that powerful when their system fell. --Jennie Cisna
Post 38
In The Forever War, during the first battle with the enemy, the teams under Cortez were told that a post-hypnotic suggestion would allow the battle to 'make your job easier'.(p64) Because this novel has strong parallels to the Vietnam War, this struck me as a criticism of the practices that the United States uses in the armed forces. Taking over one's mind is a very personal intrusion. Obviously, Haldeman believes this practice went on in Vietnam and is trying to relate his beliefs about it. Because the setting is 1996, it conveys Haldeman's ideas of what might have happened in the very near future after 1970. Are military practices like these beneficial to the country and the ones serving? Is it ethical to do these things without the knowledge of the 'patients'? --Deidra Dame
Post 39
This is a post that I would like to talk about the book Ender's Game in. I want to talk about the reason why Ender saw his brother Peter in the mirror in Fantasy Land. I believe that it was not what the book was saying and that he saw Peter because he was turning into Peter, but I believe that he saw Peter because the mirror was showing Ender who is exact opposite was. I believe that Ender would never develop into Peter because his character is way too strong for that to happen. Peter is evil on the inside and Ender is just evil when it comes down to working out a strategy to win the battle. I believe that Orson Scott Card just wanted people to think that Ender was turning into Peter, but still have the thought in the back of their minds that Ender would never turn into something so evil. --Ryan T. Monahan
Post 40
I found a very interesting theme in the novel "Ender's Game"- this being that of optimizing creativity. I really latched on to this theme in the book and understood the reasoning behind it. With I being an artist I find it very necessary to isolate myself for long periods of time to push myself into a Personal creativity breakthrough. When isolation occurs you can minamalize all external influences and problem solving solutions. You have to rely entirly on the self, which I feel is extremely healthy for both the self as input and output. I'm not sure if anyone else can see where I am coming from or the way this part of the book touched me personally- but it did and I am pleased to have experienced it. All in all I really connected with this novel and am extremely exited to read more of the series. --Jason Durbin
Post 41
In The Forever War, Haldeman does an exceptional job in exercising the readers mind as to the technical aspects of inter-stellar travel without using hard to digest terms and concepts. For instance, on page ten he describes the "cattlewagon" trip to the training planet of Charon, of which he says, " "the whole trip took three weeks, accelerating at two gees halfway, decelerating the other half." Although I'm illiterate as to finer (or pretty much all) points of physics, it makes sense that acceleration / deceleration of this nature would be necessary for space travel (at least in its rudimentary form that would probably be found in the given near future time frame of the book). Therefore, it is feasible that the discomfort of g's would be experienced as a necessary evil. Later in the book, another concept is outlined concerning travel that requires acceleration producing twenty five g's (p. 83). In order to survive, occupants of the ship must be put into pressure suits, submerged in fluid, and the fluid pressurized to simulate pressure found at "deep sea levels." A cumbersome but, again, necessary discomfort. To me, these well written technical problem/solution passages lend a dose of reality to the novel that the previous books (excepting Asimov) have not quite matched. --Erick Hubbard
Post 42
In class last Tuesday, we discussed our views on the end of the book. I believe that the end of the book is a great way to pull together the story, and makes you feel sad, and in a way happy. It is very emotional, and makes the story just seem to fit together. Yes, it does leave the possibility for a sequel open, but the book could also be left alone. It is a finished novel as is, but it also can fit well in a series. I also think that it is not just trying to put a happy ending on the story, since in a way it actually made Ender feel more guilty for his inhilation of an entire race. In addition, the game being set up on the other planet made us realize that the buggers knew what was happening and did not attack back. Therefore, I believe this made the book and even better book by ending the story in this manner. --Misty Dillow
Post 43
During the presentation on Tuesday, Chris brought up a very good point. After reading the book I thought that maybe it should have ended differently too. There is so much for Ender to do, but instead he takes the easy way out, which does not seem like Ender. Ender faced all of his so called demons during the book except for his brother Peter. I just can't believe that after wiping out an alien race Ender is going to let Peter win. Ender was anxious about coming back to Earth so he could spend time at the cabin and be with Val until Val told him that Peter ruled the world and that he was waiting for Ender's return. On page 312 Val tells Ender that "He had plans for you", Peter was going to make Ender out to be the bad guy. Val had to black mail Peter into letting her and Ender have their freedom. I thought that Ender should have came back to Earth and put Peter in his place. Ender should not be afraid of his big brother anymore, he should not have to runaway. I think it makes Ender look like a coward. Ender had the chance to save him and his sister from Peter but instead they runaway. --Michelle Snoke
Post 44
The most interesting thing I found about the book Ender's Game was that all the characters were children for the most part. I thought it was interesting because of how much Orson Scott Card loves children. You can really tell he appreciates children by the way he wrote the characters in his book. He gave the a high level of intelligence and the ability to save the world. I thought that was interesting about his writing. --Wendy Walton
Post 45
The Theme of Colonization, Propaganda, Brainwashing, and Destruction of Native Pops in The Forever War "My mind reeled under the strong pseudo-memories: shaggy hulks that were Taurans (not at all what we now knew they looked like) boarding a colonists' vessel, eating babies while mothers watched in screaming terror ( the colonists never took babies; they wouldn't stand the acceleration), then raping the women to death with huge veined purple members (ridiculous that they would fell desire for humans), holding the men down while they plucked flesh from their living bodies and gobbled it ( as if they could assimilate the alien protein)...a hundred grisly details as sharply remembered as the events of a minute ago, ridiculously overdone and logically absurd. But while my conscious mind was rejecting the silliness, somewhere much deeper down in that sleeping animal where we keep our real motives and morals, something was thirsting for alien blood,..." (66) I thought that this passage from the Forever War is really integral to understanding the theme of conquest and domination that the humans of the novel feel they need assert over the Taurans. This section describes the subliminal messages the troopers were implanted with as a sort of brain washing technique to make them hate the Taurans, so that they would feel more need to kill them. I thought that the structure of this passage was interesting. The narrator describes for us a scene from the subliminal messages in his mind, and then goes on to state how the emotional charged message makes no logical sense. However, even as the narrator knows these images or "brainwashing" are false he still longs for the blood of the aliens. I think this passage ties into the larger picture of the novels theme of colonization and domination of alien forces well also. I can't help, but think the way the government or Army is trying to make the Taurans look to the soldiers and narrator are very similar to savages. When Europe was colonizing the Americas, the idea that the natives were savages was wide spread propaganda, and acted as excuses, making the destruction and assimilation of their land and culture OK in their eyes. I think it is too much coincidence that one of the commander's of the troop's name is Cortez. Remember that Cortez was a conquistador, and was responsible for the exploration the America's, and the deaths of hundreds of natives. I also believe that one cannot ignore the fact that this book is talking about the colonization of alien planets, which also gives rise to the theme of how the Native Americans were treated to make way for our settlement. I believe that all theses issues are present in the novel as far as I have read, and that these Hitler like brainwashing techniques of the Army are only a part of the testament to this theme that Haldeman is discussing. I think that he has picked a great metaphors with which to take on the subject. I think that the white man must have looked pretty alien to the Native Americans at first. In fact I think that the Aztecs saw them as Gods form the heavens. Their are a ton of other parallels I could draw, but just think of picture that the subliminal propaganda painted in the narrator's mind, and that of how white men thought they were justified in taking the land and lives of the Native Americans. --Joshua Primm
Response to Post 29
Response to Post 29: I thought it was odd that in the book no one wanted a third child and that Ender came from parents that were from big families. I don't feel that the government in the future might try to limit the number of children people have. I think it is just todays society that thinks it is bad to have big families. So many people want careers instead of families and that is the reason big families are on the decline. I don't think the government will have anything to do with it. --Wendy Walton
Post 46
The questioned was posed in relation to Ender's Game, would the government use child geniuses to help save the world, in a future society of ours? I would have to respond by saying that using a current critique of society, I think that if IQ or intellegence levels equalling those in Ender's Game was apparent or exisisted in more children in our society there is no telling what the government would try to use them for. Even throughout the world the history of war and conflict provide support to back the use of children in war ( of course not as young as Ender and his crew) but the military aspect in society thoughout the different cultures in the world has shown that if the person can be trained effectively in combat both mentally and physically then to war they go. I think Dr. O'Conner pointed this out with a similar dicussion in class, the Vietnam war 18 yrs old, that is still a child even in today or especially in todays standards. --Tony Calzaretta
Response to Post 32
I am replying to post 32- "Free will in Ender's Game as explained by Valentine." First off I would like to compliment Mr. Primm on picking out this quote, It also caught my eye and deserved a couple re-reads. This is one of those areas of looking at society at a third person level. Josh touched on many of the interesting points interlinked with society and the choices available within it. I also would like to add the area of discussion concerning how people are treated if they break these predetermined decisions. What- your labeled a rebel or maybe just difficult- or the best one yet " that person must be on drugs". In extreme cases if you think for yourself completely you become arrested or presumed crazy. Not fitting into the norm or being a free decision maker can balance either way - either your labeled a genius or mentally ill. What is the difference? --Jason Durbin
Post 47
At the end of the novel, Mandella returns to a way-station for returnees. The clone in charge tells him that the war was pointless. When the two armies (Earth and Tauran) could finally talk to each other, "The first question was 'Why did you start this thing?' and the answer was, 'Me?'" (p. 249). The war had been started by Earth, which had lost some space vessels (probably due to accident). When they met the Taurans, the Earth commanders immediately assumed that the loss of the ships was due to the Taurans. Plus, the war had the added benefit of helping the economy. I think, knowing Haldeman's background, that he was making a comment on the Vietnam War. Many people thought that war was just as stupid and pointless as the war in this novel is. Haldeman is also pointing out the need to communicate in order to solve conflict - this could also be mirroring the Vietnam War. In my history class, we discussed how everybody in the State Department who could speak the languages of Southeast Asia had been fired before the war started. Part of the cause of Vietnam could be due to the fact that we couldn't discuss the problems that we saw. I also think that this novel can universalize to any war. Haldeman does not glorify war - it is bloody, young people die, they are separated from their families and sent to foreign, hostile environments, and they are told to do this by older men who really don't get sent into danger. I enjoyed this book, did anyone else? --Jennie Cisna
Response to Post 27
Response to Post 27 :Erick, I agree that war means that beating your enemy so mercilessly that he/she/it can never never come back to hurt you again. We are meant to sympathize and understand the actions of Ender, and I think that Card does a good job of that. However, I think that we should remember that the Israelis may be fighting a battle on the wrong side of history. I am aware that Israel is a holy land for the Jews, for the Christians (and Catholics, like me), but it is also a holy land for Muslims. This is why the Palestinians enjoyed living there for nearly 2000 years, and why they were a little upset that the UN arbitrarily gave the Israelis their land (in 1947, if memory serves) to make up for WWII. Israel has done a good job of protecting itself - and its people are to be admired for their bravery - but we should also have respect that the winners in war may also be the "bad guys." --Jennie Cisna
Post 48
The last line of Post 26 brought to mind a lyric of an old Phil Ochs song: "It's always the old to lead us to a war, always the young to die, now look at all we've won with a saber and a gun, tell me is it worth it all?" I agree that Card is commenting on past wars and the military's knack for programming the young to do its bidding. It also, for some reason, brought to mind my grandfather. Like me, my grandpa returned to finish school in his late 20's here at Millikin. A genetic problem? No. Unlike me, the reason he left college was to fight in World War II. He spent several precious years of his youth dropping bombs (he was a bombardier aboard a B-24) on German cities. Subsequently, he was shot down and placed in a prison camp. He carried out the wishes of the government, blowing people up. Maybe it had to be done. Maybe not. I guess it didn't change the end result: the war robbed him of the remainder of his youth and almost swiped his life. It forever changed him. Wars are good at that. Governments are good at wars. --Erick Hubbard
Response to Post 26
In response to Post 26, I do agree that the novel, Ender's Game is referring to having children in war in our own society. After all, their children are drafted around 8, 9, 10 etc, but our young people are often drafted around 18, 19, 20. I think that maybe Card is trying to show that the people that we send off to war are yet still children. Yet, while all of us would think that sending an eight year old off to war was appalling, we have no trouble letting an 18 year old fight. The difference in age is actually quite small. I therefore do believe that by using children in this novel he is making a connection between the wars of today and these "future wars". --Misty Dillow
Post 49
In the book, The Forever War, the health care system on Earth is discussed when Mandella's mother becomes ill. A nurse says to Mandella, "It's part of the Universal Medical Security System. Everybody gets a rating on their seventieth birthday. It tells how important a person is and what level of treatment he's allowed." The fact that Haldeman chose to use this health care system seems very interesting to me. In our world today, major health care reform is taking place, and some people believe that we need a national health care program so that all people receive equal health care. In this future world, some people are totally denied health care while others are given more attention. This seems to be the total opposite of what we are now fighting for in America. Being able to rate someone on their importance is far from having equal health care for all people regardless of economic status. I think that it is interesting that Haldeman chose to use a world in which this sort of system was in place and that it makes them world seem even more strange to the reader. --Misty Dillow
[Index][Week1/5]
[Week6]
[Week7]
[Week8]
[Week9]
[Week10]
[Week11]
[Week12]
[Week13]
