Controversial Author Wins Edwards Award
Submitted by mwilliams on Mon, 2008-01-21 20:29.The author is Orson Scott Card, and the controversy is his stance on gay and lesbian sexuality. Once again we are faced with the question of whether an author’s personal views should factor into judging the literary merit of his work. Should Card’s anti-gay sentiments bar him from award nominations? Or is that just another kind of prejudice?
If you had a Wordsy account you could comment on this story. Get an account now!
Seeing as how he includes his crap in his work (particularly his work in the last ten years), I certainly think awards givers should take into account his views. But then, I'm not a believer in compartmentalizing things.
Rat's Reading - http://reading.kingrat.biz/
I don't think he includes his crap in the work for which he is getting the award though. In fact, the works were chosen for having "a long-term, positive impact on teens." I think he should be allowed to have an opinion. Why should fame as a writer bar an individual from voicing sentiments that others may not agree with? His opinion pieces are another thing altogether. Praise the artist for his art, I say.
There is no thief like a bad book
--Italian Proverb
The Edwards Award is for his lifetime contribution, with two of his works singled out by the award committee. On lifetime contribution, you have to include all his work. In addition, the two works singled out are not really something I would consider good children's fare. They certainly are popular and accessible to young adults, but are pretty horrific morally. Ender's Game, in particular, has Ender Wiggin brutally murdering a classmate, who is a bully, despite the fact that the bully poses no threat to him. Card excuses this conduct for two reasons in the book. First, because the bully might pose a threat to him in the future (never mind that the danger the bully might pose isn't life threatening). And second, because Ender Wiggin is a good person with ultimately good intentions, all his actions, including killing the bully and wiping out an entire race of beings, are justifiable. It's not exactly the properly reviled "ends justify the means" argument, but that moral judgment hinges on intentions and not actions.
Add into it that his homophobia does come into play in other of his works (lifetime contribution again), I can't see how this award is appropriate.
At one point, Card was a great writer. His later work is nearly unreadable though. And the morals he espouses in his work are repugnant.
Rat's Reading - http://reading.kingrat.biz/
Well, I'll have to read the two books before arguing Card's overall morality (I think one has to take into account the context/ideology of his created world to determine whether he was actually advocating immorality for 20th century teenagers), but I didn't see that as being the point of the story. The issue wasn't his general lack of morals, it was his anti-gay stance, which is not, as far as I know, mirrored in the mentioned works. In fact, the committee states they weren't aware of it, and you'd have to assume they've read his books.
I am a bit confused about the award itself. "The Margaret A. Edwards Award, established in 1988, honors an author, as well as a specific body of his or her work, that have been popular over a period of time," according to the award site. And it does seem as if they're only looking at his young adult writings... "Nevertheless, Shanks says that Card’s views aren’t reflected in the books that were chosen..."
There is no thief like a bad book
--Italian Proverb
Card never actually wrote a young adult novel. Years after they were published a few were repackaged as young adult with no change to the actual text, just the covers. The language and style of much of his work is certainly suitable for the age level.
Rat's Reading - http://reading.kingrat.biz/
This is a good argument on the morality in Ender's Game.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~tenshi/Killer_000.htm
In fact, it's good enough that I think I'll post it as it's own story.
Rat's Reading - http://reading.kingrat.biz/
So, if I got this right, we have a rabid fundie who very likely believes in an eye for an tooth and that gay people have no right to choose their own way of life?
Sounds like the definition of an idiot and an asshole. He deserves an award made of feces, if at all.
I know I probably step on many toes here but if what kingrat wrote, about Ender's Game, is correct then this is not a person I think anyone should consider a role model - perhaps back in the late Middle Ages he could have been an example for the Spanish Inquisition...
Hey, I'm not saying he's not an asshole. I have no idea what the man's like. What I'm saying is that if he wrote two perfectly acceptable books that had a positive influence, with none of his views included in those works, why should he not get an award for those works? Is giving someone an award because they wrote a great book the same as making them a role model? Did Ender's Game mess up your mind as a teenager? Did it drive you to immoral acts? I can't say, as I've never read the works in question, but I do suspect that the morality of the character's actions was probably right for the worldview of the novel (and I also give teens the credit for being smart enough to recognize that). What the guy believes about gays has no bearing on the novels that he's getting the award for. Saying "Oh he's an idiot, give him shit" seems a bit of an emotional reaction. It smacks of letting hatred blind the reason...inquisitorial even. You can be an asshole and still do something commendable, for heaven's sake. That's all I'm saying here.
One thing's for sure...I'm definitely going to read the books now :).
There is no thief like a bad book
--Italian Proverb
Ender's Game is a really good story. (Ender's Shadow not so much.) It's well written and engrossing. It was well-deserving of the Hugo and Nebula awards which it won in 1985. It just doesn't seem to fit the criteria of the Edwards award. But it is well worth a read.
Rat's Reading - http://reading.kingrat.biz/
Well, I've read the criteria of the Edwards award, and nowhere did I come across sanctions against authors whose personal views are disagreeable. And, as far as I can tell, the books themselves fit the criteria just fine:
http://www.ala.org/ala/yalsa/booklistsawards/margaretaedwards/maepolicy/policiesprocedures.cfm
I am, however, going to make a point of reading the books so that I can revisit this issue and be in a more solid position to either embrace or refute your particular argument re the morality of the works. :) Besides, I've been told by any number of people now that Ender's Game is an awesome book, and I like awesome books.
There is no thief like a bad book
--Italian Proverb