I personally think asking the class to put themselves in the position to decide how to handle the buggers was a bad idea. I know that the intention was to foster a debate about the morals and factors that went into such a situation. However, it quickly devolved into a few people saying the IF were absolutely right and a few saying they were absolutely wrong. I don't think there was any real development of an argument other than the two sides becoming so entrenched that they were not able to see the others perspective.
As far as the discussions of a possible movie. I am probably one of the few that believe a movie could work for this book. However, I think Card would have to be removed from the project. If a movie version let the audience know that Ender was not just playing a game then the entire point of the story would be missing. The story works because not only is Ender shocked but the reader is too. If the viewer knew in the beginning, where would the shock be?
I think this is one of the best books we have read yet. I just wish we were watching Starship Troopers this week because I can see alot of parallels with that, not so many with Aliens.
4 comments:
I'm having trouble figuring out what an unbiased, objective view of this debate would look like. How would this argument be developed?
I was strongly on the side of the I.F., but I understand the disgust someone else might feel. I can't elaborate my reasons for arguing what I did without arguing what I did, and I don't want to come across as entrenched in what I think. What a paradox! Please, I' d like you to show me the way out of it.
That's just the problem, there can't be an unbiased one. If I were to find the way you would have to pay me alot of money for being some kind of genius.
It's true that there can't be an unbiased view of the debate. I stood by the I.F. based on human military strategy that I was surrounded by growing up. I'm not saying that the I.F. was necessarily correct in there approach, as I said I would have tried to communicate first.
The world is full of these debates, just look at the debates revolved around Clinton and Obama.
As for the shock about the games. I've never read the book until know but while I was reading it I felt something wasn't right with the simulations from the part of the fantasy games. Maybe I'm drawing on my own experience swith the Predator (MQ-1). At first glance it looks like a nice video game setup, when it is actually the controls to the drone.
If it's impossible to have an unbiased view, and there's no value or development in a biased argument, then do you think we shouldn't have discussed the book at all?
Post a Comment