Card’s creative writing was excellent in terms of learning creative writing. The man truly does have a solid grasp of storytelling. But one incident continues to stick in my mind.

As with many such seminars, all participants read one another’s stories and critique them in a round-table discussion. As a minor point, I commented that the phrasing in one story came across as a bit homophobic and that may alienate some readers. Card became very agitated, insisted that there is no such thing as “homophobia”, and continued to rant in that vein for about fifteen minutes before we could get back to critiquing stories.

At that point, I had no idea Card held such beliefs but it was shortly afterward that I came across an essay Card had written for a Mormon magazine called “The Hypocrites of Homosexuality” which made his feelings on the subject quite clear. Controversial as that view was, even for the early 90s, I only learned of it because people had found the article, transcribed it, and began reprinting it on the ‘net.

Card’s response was similar to the one in this current kerfluffle. He insisted that the article was intended for a very specific audience and, therefore, anyone outside of that audience who read it had no business being offended by it since it was not meant for them to see. In addition, he threatened to sue everyone who reprinted it for copyright infringement. Since then, he has continued to write many more articles on the same theme, as well as expanding into the anti-Muslim genre.

Over the years, I continued to read Card’s novels and, while I still enjoyed some of them, knowing what I did of Card’s views on homosexuality made his tragic, twisted portrayals of gay characters (and Muslim characters) difficult to ignore. Eventually, I realized I just couldn’t bring myself to keep reading his work because an author does NOT stand apart from their work. An author’s beliefs and views fundamentally shape their work. In fact, back at the seminar, Card told me that being a writer was the best way to change the way other people see the world.

In a similar vein, I once had an offer to illustrate an upcoming novella. It was a good offer with a promise of regular royalties on sales of the book. But, after reading the manuscript, I felt I could not, in good conscience, create illustrations for a story that written based on an ignorant and racist interpretation of Japan with a half dozen racist “jokes” on every page. The money would have been nice but I just couldn’t do it.

We’re all a little nuts, it’s true. Some nuts are tolerable. Some are not. But creative nuts tend to express their nuttiness through their work. An author’s work does not stand apart from the author.

Lawrence Watt-Evans – another great writer, but I just completely lost respect for him with his attempted spin of Sander’s words; and I won’t be buying anything more from him as a result.

The difference? I suppose whatever else, OSC owns his convictions, he may be a nutter, but he owns his nutterhood.

LWE trying to soft peddle Sander’s words when it’s fairly obvious what he meant is just an indefensible position – I think everyone is pretty clear exactly what he was saying. That’s more along the lines of trying to put a throw rug over the carpet where you just spilled ink. You need to own up to the fact that a fellow editor just went off the deep end, not try to cover it up with what most people at best will see as a weak attempt to soothe people, and at worst an out and out lie.

Whatever you are – own it, be it. Be a nutter, be a racist, be a wanna-be-writer (Well, Mur’s no longer in that category with the playing for keeps novel coming out – Congratulations!!), be humanitarian, be charitable. Just be real.

I’m a wanna-be-writer, I’ll be that way for a long time and I own it, every day I work at it.

That said, I’m not entirely sure I dispute his right to hold such views. I can’t remember if it was Thomas Payne or Patrick Henry who said “I may disagree with what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it.” He has as much right to think whatever he wants as I have to think that he’s an idiotic, backward-minded trogolodyte.

Had he been sending a similarly-themed message to a friend, as a private correspondence, then I would think his apology (“I’m sorry it got out”) would be perfectly appropriate. I would also think that his views were repugnant, and would still happily say so. The problem is that, as Mur says, he crossed the line when he sent it as a professional letter.

I guess where I’m going with this is that people have the right to think (and as their personal views, say) whatever they want, whether we like it or not. However, we equally have the right to explain to them why their views are not only wrong, but also self-destructive. In the end, I think that’s got to be a better way to go than just calling someone names on a blog.

*if HE was the most*

Ender’s Game is a fabulous novel, one of the best science fiction novels ever written (in my opinion). However, I think Orson Scott Card is a nutcase, I disagree with his politics and much of his morality. That doesn’t detract from a fantastic piece of work.

That said however, this is very much not the same thing. Firstly, because the guilty party here is not someone who’s produced anything fantastic, that makes keeping up with him worthwhile. Secondly, because this is not something that is kept separate from his work – this man is being deliberately offensive to at least two individuals (not to mention an entire culture) through his job. There should be boundaries between his professional life, and whatever crackpot opinions he may or may not hold. The fact that even after being fairly racist in a professional venue he proceeded to be childish and petulant about it publicly is detestable. To me, it wouldn’t affect my perception of his public works if we was the most racist man alive in private, but when he does it through the medium which he puts out, and then is childish about it then it’s a different story.

Furthermore, the latest refusal to allow people to remove their stories strikes me as moderately questionable from a legal standpoint – but I guess it would depends on what agreement the parties initially signed.

I think being nice and treating others right is important. I think we’re all human and on the internet it’s so easy to hit the submit button and then wish we hadn’t.

But I think the grownup who is serious about being a success, whether in writing or in life, faces up to their mistakes and apologizes. And not because the wrong person saw it. Because it was a craptacular thing to say.

Small-mindedness begets mediocrity and I can’t help but think big shots who are assholes are living on borrowed time. Fans DO get pissed off and stop reading, and while some assholes still may remain famous, they’ve lost a lot of respect, and probably a lot of readers.

I’d rather be someone that people can say: “She’s a great person, she’s down to earth and she doesn’t think she’s better than me.” In the long run I think it gets more mileage.