Having just finished Ender's Game I want to organize my thoughts about the story and it's mechanics. I learn daily that as a writer I read differently; now I care about the structure of a work almost as much as the story it contains. I'll keep separate my thoughts on Orson Scott Card's politics from those on his writing. His books and essays on writing inspired me to put the stories in my head down for others to read and (hopefully) enjoy.
Ender's Game tells Ender's story from a third-person present-tense viewpoint. With only two exceptions (both instances being Valentine), we see only Ender's thoughts and emotions; Card presents everything else as Ender experiences it. Despite the amount of growth and change Ender experiences, the book is an event story; it starts when Ender is accepted into Battle School (to prepare to fight the buggers) and ends when Ender defeats the buggers. Telling the story from Ender's perspective and having Ender as both protagonist and main character makes sense; only Ender experiences and sees everything. For another character to tell the story, Card would either have significant gaps during the narration of the command school or Card would have to switch narrators during the story; both choices feel inferior to me. Choosing the event structure also makes the most sense; Ender's importance lies in his potential to defeat the buggers once and for all. Focusing on Ender's changes (telling the story using the character structure) would dilute the series of crises that forged Ender's spirit and honed his instincts. (Although I do agree that the events that happen after, on the unnamed colony world ARE significant to the story, they represent almost a second climax). The structure reminds me of Lord of the Rings; Frodo getting thrust into the events of the world and him leaving the world after having left his mark bookend the narrative of the three books. His leaving Middle Earth after Mt. Doom was a necessary step to highlight his story's conclusion; much like Ender Wiggin's discovery and subsequent journey conclude Ender's story (at least in term of the first book_.
Card's prose does not dwell on description; it displays a verbal frugality that drives the narrative and allows evocative language double purpose: not only does a detailed description add to the texture of the story but it also draws the reader's attention by demonstrating value. These descriptions seldom occur. Card describes action much as he does scenery or people - sparsely and efficiently. His strength is his ability to invoke in the reader empathy for Ender's plight throughout the entire novel. The one weakness that my attention always comes back to is how unchildlike Ender acts, even after we are told he is still a child. On some levels, it's that maturity and fresh intelligence that drives the story but occasionally I found myself stepping out of the story to wrestling with some act Ender performs.
Nonetheless, Ender's Game earns its place at the top of Sci-Fi food chain. The story compels and is carried along by tight prose focusing on the important and never giving the spotlight to something which should remain in the obscurity of the footlights. If, by some chance, you have not read this book it should be moved to the top of your "to read next" pile.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
I'll leave some thoughts too, since feedback and interaction are important. I think part of the reason this book works as well as it does is because while it is telling a SF story of alien "monsters" and war, it is at its core a story of a young child away at school. This is such a common experience, everyone can identify with Ender on at least some level. Then you add in the fact that he is being sent away from home to live with other children his age, and you have a very strong common bond with most readers. We all have been away from home in some capacity. Either we went to boarding school or college or even summer camp.
We can sympathize with this boy at a very fundamental level. And as Forrest points out, much of this character is not to sympathize with. He is a genius of an exceptional level, but he is also violent and cruel. This ability to identify with another is the important theme for me in the Ender series.
While the event of fighting the Buggers drives the plot, the event in Ender finding who he is and empathizing with not just his enemy, but any person he chooses to learn about, this drives the story. This is how he is able to fight the buggers in the end.
This I feel is why the third (turd) person narrative focusing on Ender is so effective. On one level, because the story is about this formative experience in the life of a small boy, it has to focus on him. But also because empathy is such a strong theme in the book, it cannot be told from the perspective of any of the characters. It has to be told from the outside looking in, with no judgment or intent. (Much like the Speaker for the Dead would)
OK, so I finally brought it up. Speaker for the Dead is the greatest book in SF because without it there would be no Ender's Game. Perhaps a bit of an overstatement, but it is worth mentioning at length. Ender's Game would have stayed a short story if it hadn't been for the idea to make Ender the protagonist in Speaker as well. By deciding to incorporate the two ideas, Card had to rewrite and expand Ender to novel length. The extra long epilogue was one of the results. Perhaps this is part of the reason why Ender's game has such a focus on character and empathy.
So now I have written myself to the edge of the cliff and I don't know where to go from here....so I'll leave my thoughts where they are, and we can discuss further.
Post a Comment