Orson Scott Card Picks a Nerd Fight with J.K. Rowling (Updated!)
Posted at 3:08 PM May 14, 2008
Update: Holy shit! You do a post with no research whatsoever, stop working for the day, check your email drunk at midnight, and everything goes to hell. Okay, so I've read all your comments and chosen to do the tiniest bit of research and am willing to admit I was wrong; Card was indeed being sarcastic. I blame the internet for failing to present me with all the facts immediately, which I did not know could happen. Interestingly, I now sympathize with Rowling—someone's trying to profit off her work in the most simple way, so she should get a cut of those profits, or at least be able to say yay or nay to the project—and I still feel Card is being kind of a dick. His analogy of incredibly traditional plot devices doesn't hold weight, because the dudes doing the Potter Lexicon are printing Rowling's words verbatim, not replicating story elements used since the dawn of time. If someone reprinted Topless Robot shit and just changed the titles (or just prefaced every entry with "Rob said") I'd be pissed, and legitimately so, I think. If I claimed that I was the first person to make fun of toys and comics and anime and all that shit, I'd be a moron (a different kind of moron). So the end result is the same as per my original post (which is after the jump, if you'd like to revel in my ignorance), except for Rowling, who should be allowed to make an additional billion to her jillion dollars. Now I'm off to continue getting shit-faced, thank you very much.
Let's get the facts of this thing out of the way. Here's it all neatly summed up by Wired's GeekDad:
Last year, J.K. Rowling and Warner Brothers filed a lawsuit against RDR books seeking to block the release of The Harry Potter Lexicon, the print version of a fan-created online encyclopedia helmed by school librarian Steve Vander Ark. While RDR has assembled a defense team including Stanford Law’s Fair Use Project to fight the suit, Vander Ark, who apears to have aroused the ire of much of the vocal fan community, has recently received a vote of support from a seemingly unlikely ally.Author Orson Scott Card blasted Rowling in Greensboro’s news and opinion weekly The Rhinoceros Times saying:
"Can you believe that J.K. Rowling is suing a small publisher because she claims their 10,000-copy edition of The Harry Potter Lexicon, a book about Rowling's hugely successful novel series, is just a "rearrangement" of her own material.
Rowling "feels like her words were stolen," said lawyer Dan Shallman.
Well, heck, I feel like the plot of my novel Ender's Game was stolen by J.K. Rowling.
A young kid growing up in an oppressive family situation suddenly learns that he is one of a special class of children with special abilities, who are to be educated in a remote training facility where student life is dominated by an intense game played by teams flying in midair, at which this kid turns out to be exceptionally talented and a natural leader. He trains other kids in unauthorized extra sessions, which enrages his enemies, who attack him with the intention of killing him; but he is protected by his loyal, brilliant friends and gains strength from the love of some of his family members. He is given special guidance by an older man of legendary accomplishments who previously kept the enemy at bay. He goes on to become the crucial figure in a struggle against an unseen enemy who threatens the whole world."
I fully believe Rowling is being a bitch by stopping the Potter Lexicon; there's no reason to stop someone from publishing what is more or less a big Harry Potter fan book other than money, and Rowling already has a jillion dollars. So not cool. But for Card to call her out for copying Ender's Game? Also a dick move.
Hey, Orson—"a young kid growing up in an oppressive family situation suddenly learns that he is one of a special class of children with special abilities"—that plot has been used with minor tweaks from the days of King Arthur (best exemplified in The Once and Future King) and Cinderella. It's pretty much the based for the Lord of the Rings, Eddings' Belgariad and about a zillion other fantasy stories, and your whole little diatribe is nearly a perfect match for Mobile Suit Gundam (minus the experienced older man), which came out in 1979. Oh, and a little movie called Star Wars seems a bit close to your description as well.
I fully think Ender's Game is a better book than Harry Potter, but Card did not create the "special child" in fantasy literature—but calling out Rowling for being unoriginal and citing a mess of plot devices used for centuries as your own? That makes you an ass.
Comments
Ugh-- I do think Rowling is being ridiculous, and Ender's Game and its varying sequels are great, Card's being a douche.
Maybe this is some kind of giant author conspiracy: "let's see just how obnoxious we can all be!"
Yech.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 12:50:47 PMI think you just restated Card's point and just added that he is an ass. He is ripping on Rowling for feeling that her words were stolen. He could say the same thing and so could every author going back into history.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 12:52:33 PMI think you may have taken his statement perhaps a little too seriously.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 12:55:39 PMIt appears to me that it was more a method of criticism than actually accusing Rowling of stealing his plot devices.
I agree with Anonymous. Card's words point out the absurdity of Rawling's claims. He's not ACTUALLY accusing her of stealing his work; instead he is illustrating that there is nothing new under the sun.
Of course how much must it suck to be Orson Scott Card; he has to spend all day everyday talking about the ONE (and only one) brilliant book that he wrote.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 01:05:17 PMSorry, guys, I don't buy it. If Card meant to be sarcastic, he would be far less obtuse about it; I do believe he has that writing ability. Card's words do point out the absurdity of Rowling's claims, but that doesn't mean Card's words aren't equally absurd.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 01:17:58 PMMitch——Speaker of the Dead is better than Ender's Game.
Clearly, none of you have done any actual research into what the Lexicon consists of. Something like 92% of it consists of direct quotes or minimal paraphrasing, and that's not me pulling a statistic out of my ass; that's based on an analysis of the text after it was entered into evidence. Rowling's said herself she thinks book commentaries on her series are fine as long as they're original. If someone took my words and rearranged them to make a quick buck, I'd be pissed too. And that's not even mentioning the many documented ways RDR Books has lied and acted in bad faith. What, just because she's rich she's not allowed to protect her copyright?
Learn. Read.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 01:21:15 PMGah, how can you take his comments seriously??? Clearly he was trying to make a point about creative rights by being ironic.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 01:30:56 PMIf you read more of the article than the bit posted, you would see that Card goes on to talk about all authors borrow from one another. He is obviously not insinuating that he has a case against Rowling but instead just illustrating what a greedy hypocrite she is. You could make a case against Card for getting so worked up and spouting off all his criticisms of Rowling with a righteous indignation that comes across as pretty silly, but not for claiming that he could bring suit against her.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 01:47:38 PMLike most of those who have already commented, I think you have mischaracterized what Card was saying. Read his own words, in their entirety:
http://www.linearpublishing.com/RhinoStory.html
The snippet you quoted was plainly tongue in cheek. He essentially says "Her claim is frivolous. And her whining is disingenuous. It's as silly if I were to say that she stole the plot of my book."
You portray this as a situation in which the pot is calling the kettle black, when it is nothing of the sort. Nowhere does Card claim, as you insinuate, that he created the "special child" in literature. Nowhere does he claim that the plot devices used for centuries are his own. He criticizes her for her greed, pride, and disingenuity by contrasting what she has done with what he could do... but doesn't. It's a pretty compelling case.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 02:40:31 PMUpon reading the full article, it becomes fully apparent that Card is not seriously claiming that the Harry Potter series was a rip-off of Ender's Game. While he might be dickish about it, the points he makes are fully valid. The full article might be harsh, but it's all very true.
"neatly summed up" for the lose.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 02:41:57 PMYeah, I remember reading OSC's original post on the subject; it's all standard "Hero's Journey" stuff, and he explicitly states that it would be absurd of him to suggest...
...ah. I see Patriarch917 above has eloquently stated what I was about to. In any case, Rob, whether or not you buy it is irrelevant. Card is very clearly not accusing anybody of ripping him off. You may wish to correct your analysis to avoid spreading a misrepresentation of his position.
(And yeah, Speaker for the Dead was better than Ender's Game, so we're of one mind -- heh -- on that one.)
Posted 05/14/2008 at 03:12:33 PMSpeaking of un-original, there's a 1970s-ish book called The Fuzzy Papers about mankind finding a fuzzy life form on a planet that turns out to be far more intelligent than they thought, which is TOTALLY the basis for the piggies Speaker for the Dead, and don't make me show my age by bringing up Decision at Doona, please don't do that. Anyway, Ender's Game is FABULOUS, the other three books were not nearly as good (it's rare that I'm sorry I read something), and all the latter-day "Anne McCaffication" style books are not even worthy of comment. IMHO.
Posted 05/15/2008 at 08:38:20 AMCard is a Hack. He recycles Heinlein plots and ideas and calls them his own. That sentient computer of his in the later Ender series? Yup, stole directly from Heinlein (see Time Enough For Love, published June 1973).
And Card is not even a good writter. Enders Game and Ender's Shadow are the only ones worth reading (and yes, I've read them all so far, so call me a sucker for continuing to read his crap).
Seriously, Card is the most over-rated author in science fiction. ever.
Posted 05/15/2008 at 10:03:03 AMThis is a tough one.
Is Card being tongue in check or is he suffering from a bit of delusion ?
I think the answer lies somewhere in between.
Say what you want about good old uncle Orson ( which has a kinda creepy pedophile vibe to it,) the gent often expresses a sheer inferiority complex.
But he won the nebula and hugo and has sold millions of books, you say.
Yes children, this is not enough for him.
Card made the statement to spark debate and draw battle lines. Card wants to win the Y.A. literary war, Pullman with his atheism is a serve blow to his carefully constructed Mormon Superman. Rowling and her tinges of paganism, combined with audacious popularity, threatens to render ender irrelevant.
The faux plagiarism charge can only be meant to set off a readership of fairly low intellect, who are fiercely protective of their chosen idol.
Keep in mind Card has often lambasted other on (at the best) specious charges of plagiarism. He claims the Sixth sense is
a bastardize reworking of his novel Lost Boys( I don't buy it)and he claims The Village is another case of plagiarism. Though before he ripped M Night ( can't spell the last name i'll call him Smith) , he did at least acknowledge he had not seen the film.
Thus this is the level of intellectual discourse you get from a revered figure.
Did he really mean it- well I think the answer is yes and no. Sic Et Non.
Posted 07/04/2008 at 07:09:00 PM