Science fiction goes political

[Jem'hadar]

Science fiction goes political
In books out now, President Chelsea Clinton hosts Osama bin Laden while most of the country lives under Sharia law.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...,1973300.story

[Doug Burke]

Somehow, I'm not surprised to find out that Orson Scott Card is involved in this...

[First of Two]

Hm... my first reaction was "methinks the lady doth protest too much."

[LUGTrekGM]

I think I'll wait till I get my own Nebula award before I start criticizing.

[Erik Filean]

"...goes political?" Whoever wrote that headline really could have tried doing a little research first. When was science fiction not political?

Now, for the "plots" described in the article, a headline like "Science fiction gets stupid" would be perfectly appropriate.

[BouncyCaitian]

War of the Worlds was a political statement about what modern warfare (for the time) would be like disgused thingly as an alien invasion

[Owen E Oulton]

Hell, Verne's original 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and its sequel The Mysterious Island are explicitly political, with Nemo fighting against Western colonialism exemplified by the British Raj.

Curiously, one of the SF movies widely regarded as a political statement, isn't. The original Invasion of the Body Snatchers, usually cited as either an anti-McCarthy or anti-Communist statement, was actually made as a commentary on the Hollywood studio system, according to star Kevin McCarthy (no relation to Senator Joe McCarthy) in an interview with Elwy Yost, noting that director Don Siegel often referred to studio meetings as "talking to the Pod People." Siegel always claimed the movie wasn't about Commies or McCarthy, but was simply an alien invasion story.

[Cybrludite]

I'm amused that they're calling OSC conservative. (As is he, from all accounts) Somewhat less amused at the tone which seems to imply Conservatives who write sci-fi are barely (if at all) better than the git who wrote The Turner Diaries.

[Erik Filean]

I'm amused that they're calling OSC conservative. (As is he, from all accounts) Somewhat less amused at the tone which seems to imply Conservatives who write sci-fi are barely (if at all) better than the git who wrote The Turner Diaries.

The plots summarized in the article do little to validate your opinion.

[First of Two]

Of course, the plots summarized are being summarized by someone who's already determinately against them... which is kind of like judging the value of individualism via the point-of-view of the Borg Collective.

[black campbellq]

Yeah, the LA Times isn't excatly known for its balance. Card is supposedly libertarian leaning, according to Melina Snodgrass (she and Walter J Williams are at the coffeeshop I frequent a lot...)

I love how everyone jumps on boks that show Islam as a threat. To my knowledge, it's the only ideology right now openly pushing for the destruction of others...you know, Israel...secular society...ah, never mind. They're all crazy.

I've never read Card, save for an article recently on the fall of Rome, in which he takes it to Julia Smith's Europe After Rome -- a terrible book, BTW. There's a "could it happen here" bit that some may take issue with, but he recaps Ward-Perkins' latest on Rome and Grant's work on Greece pretty well. (The W-P makes some good points and is succinct. Should have been a bit longer, stronger.)

http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2006-12-03-1.html

[Doug Burke]

I'm amused that they're calling OSC conservative.

Actually, my reference was, conservative or not, OSC has just proven himself (tome, at least) to be a first-class jerk. The term "condescending, elitist git" springs to mind, actually...

[black campbellq]

My experience is that's a common trait for the arts. Save, strangely enough, for porn stars. Tera Ptrick -- nicest woman I've ever met, and not dumb as I'd expected. A friend of mine is a stripper and we meet these girls from time to time.

[Cybrludite]

The plots summarized in the article do little to validate your opinion.

And if Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity were to summarize Steakley's "Armor", Haddelman's "The Forever War", and McLeod's "The Star Fraction" (All books I rather enjoy, BTW), you'd accept a description of them being commie-symp pacifist propaganda? McLeod is an actual Trotskyite after all, and neither "Armor" nor "The Forever War" show the top brass as having evolved any since circa 1916... For that matter, would you consider "The Very Secret Diaries Of..." as a fair summarization of "The Lord of The Rings"? How about, "Kid goes crazy, murders friend's father, friend, & step-dad before succumbing to wounds" as a summary of "Hamlet"? (Sorry if that spoiled the plot for anyone) How about that as a summary if it were written by a supporter of Claudius? It becomes a bit less tounge-in-cheek then, yes?

[First of Two]

Actually, my reference was, conservative or not, OSC has just proven himself (tome, at least) to be a first-class jerk. The term "condescending, elitist git" springs to mind, actually...

Based on what, in the article, exactly? His disdain for the "mainstream" media? Hell, something like 70% of America has that, according to polls.


Certainly, the actual content of the "book review" tells us NOTHING of Card's book, except that it involves a "Second Civil War" (no info there, lots of SF books have one) and that the reviewer say it has (in his opinion) "stilted dialogue" (don't most genre snobs say vague things like this about genres they don't like?) and "improbable plot twists" (Well, it IS cience fiction, DUH. We deal primarily in the improbable! David Wiegel, here's your sign. And while you're at it, you can bite my "Captain Planet.")

And besides, the title you wish to bestow upon Card already belongs to Harlan Ellison - "and he does not share power."