Saw a preview for Ender’s Game last night. I have to admit, I’ve never read Ender’s Game. It’s one of the most glaring omissions in my sci-fi reading list–initially mostly by chance. For some reason, I just never read it when I was younger.
Now I’m quite a bit older than the target audience for Ender’s Game. And there’s a problem. I can’t stand Orson Scott Card’s political statements. The man’s neo-conservative claptrap really rubs me the wrong way. Fiscally, I tend to be pretty conservative, but I’m excessively socially liberal bordering on anarchist at times.
Is a difference of political or moral opinion a fair enough reason for not wanting to get into Card’s writing now? It’s a question that comes up in most art. Should art lacking a political or moral agenda be judged by its artist’s political views or morality? For example, if Michael Jackson is guilty of some of the things that he’s been accused of, does that make Thriller a bad song or at least one undeserving of being listened to?
It’s not always an easy question to answer. In the case of Jackson, it’s a little simpler in that his music doesn’t reflect his alleged lifestyle choices. With Card, it’s more difficult because many of his books apparently directly espouse his vitriol. But Ender’s Game is a classic in the genre and, as far as I know, does not champion any homophobic agenda.
What do you think? Heck, do you think Ender’s Game is worth it? Am I wrong about Card?
There are several belief systems I’m sympathetic toward or downright champion myself that are unpopular in many sectors. Should those personal opinions and sympathies be reason enough for a reader to dismiss my writing?