speaking of which, let's get that sucker in here
speaking of which, let's get that sucker in here
Well, I didn't like Bean at first. In Ender's Shadow I mean. Too complicated discussions, too much cruelty and murders commited by children - again. I'm glad at least Bean didn't kill anyone But then after Dragons it was absolutely different for me, especially Bean's attitude towards Ender.
And finally I found Ender's Shadow more perfect than Ender's Game... Much deeper.
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hi, Harrison!
I posted the trailer in the movie trailer thread, too. I think it looks amazing, but I'm a little confused because it looks likeSpoiler:
A lady always remembers her courtesies.
Hey-HEY-hey!
Yeah, not sure what's up with the spoilery. Maybe it's not what it looks like...?
Los̶ ver 4 Life -- @shakyandspiky on Instagram -- PMs welcome
Yes, but I have a dislike of movie trailers that show all the best stuff and then when you get to the movie everything is either average or something you've seen. I just don't want it to be one of those situations.
A lady always remembers her courtesies.
does anyone else (except the Fox ) think that bears might like the series? I've looked through the wiki article and was intimidated
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Don't be. It's a light novel on one level; no one will pressure you, I'm sure, to delve into the whole mythos. I'd say have a go, whenever.
"So many vows. They make you swear and swear. Defend the King, obey the King, obey your father, protect the innocent, defend the weak. But what if your father despises the King? What if the King massacres the innocent? It's too much. No matter what you do, you're forsaking one vow or another."
The first novel is an extremely light read, but the groundwork is laid out for some of the series' more dense, philosophical elements.
I see... bears intensely dislike dense, philosophical elements in fiction. I will have a go at the first book, though.
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's not too bad, it's just that in comparison to the first novel it's denser.
Why don't you like fiction with some philosophy in there? It seems that if any genre is ripe for mining it it would be fiction. Sphere is a great example, I think.
everything depends on how explicitly it is presented
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dense philosophy is mined in certain non-fiction if you've a taste for explicit explication.
Yes. And while it's just what is expected of non-fiction, with fiction it's just the other way round and only exposes the author as lacking the talent to provoke his readers thinking for themselves
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't think I said anything complicated (or profound, or anything I didn't say before). I mean, if in DT3 we read (quoted by heart)
Spoiler:
it's one thing; namely, something we've been thinking, talking, arguing, crying, tormenting ourselves about for decades. If we had to read speculations, however interesting, clever and deep, on the meaning of sacrifice and what it does to human soul and what are values and what is or isn't worth what - it would be quite another, totally out of place in a work of fiction, and not 0.00001 per cent as effective.
I do have to read Card, of course. I will when I come back from my travels (mid-June)
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know you have said this before. And we've argued a little. You can certainly point to clear examples that support the standard; passages which are poetic and layered versus ones which are blunt and narrow. Yet there are grey areas; that's what makes it complicated. Especially in science fiction, religious fiction, certain others.
The truth is that authors who approach universal themes in a drama, no matter how talented, always to some degree remain locked in their own perspective. We all do. Some know it, others don't... and whether you get that or not isn't always even the most important factor in presenting something of value, I think.
At times I may say, "This guy plainly has a point of view in what he's written here that might be untrue, but I still see more going on. Among all the writers who have slightly closed minds, this one is fairly bright in some ways." I don't know about you, though.
Reading pulp, I've developed a thicker skin overall -- the gems in the refuse are actually few and far between. Sometimes I wonder whether it's worth all the lifetime I have spent on it. As youths, we kind of assume that the creators behind what you can see in publication all have noble intentions; eventually we understand that they have many different motives. And most people are pretty rotten, from my own point of view. I acknowledge now that much of what I read could be categorized as "slightly closed" and "somewhat preachy." Whether it would be better to avoid this category altogether and actually read only Shakespeare, I haven't decided.
grrr, Mike, why do we always have to start the most interesting discussions primo: in the wrong threads, and secundo: when I have to go away?
I'll be back in three weeks (I hope I'll be able to check the site time to time, but not to write anything coherent)
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Bon voyage. You can talk to me any time. On threads about all different books and works of art, I keep drifting into the subjects of Books and Artwork. Maybe I'm lost. But really, I'm just trying to answer: some authors are talented, some are not talented, Orson Scott Card is in somewhere between the best and the worst.