I don't shop at Walmart, because they treat their workers like cattle, paying them such low wages that they have to beg for alms from the government. By taking advantage of these criminally underpaid workers, along with globalized supply chains, Walmart can then undersell nearly any local business. There's a reason that Walmarts are deliberately built on the edge of town, just outside of the city limits.
That is not a "personal issue" for me. It is a rational reflection on the costs and benefits of spending my money there. Sure, I've bought some cheap shampoo a few times, but I make an active effort not to give this socially detrimental organization funding and incentive to continue their business model. To claim that Walmart's social effects are somehow separate from their business practices is vacuous in the extreme.
The same line of reasoning applies to the stance I take on Orson Scott Card. I have bought several of his books, actually. I enjoy the stories he tells and was really moved by the last book in the Ender saga (nobody else likes Children of the Mind, but I do). Don't confuse my recognition that there is valid criticism of his work, on its own merit, for dislike of the stories. Much like cheap shampoo, I have enjoyed OSC's output.
However, in the same way that Walmart's business practices have intensely negative social effects, author OSC the economic unit also makes socially detrimental decisions. He actively donates money to groups that lobby against gay marriage. He actively donates money to groups that campaign against Democratic candidates for office. He actively contributes propaganda comparing Obama with Hitler, for God's sake. This is done with money he makes from his writing, or with time that he can spend because he has an income from his writing proceeds. In my estimation, these are social ills that should not be incentivized or rewarded.
To reiterate, I have found a lot of joy in OSC's writings. I'd definitely call myself a fan of some of his work. Hell, I spent some time on memorizing Ender's Game page for page. But that is not evidence that all of his work is flawless, or even that Ender's Game itself is flawless. Moreover, aside from the evaluation of his authorial ability, there are other factors that must be examined in deciding to give him my money. If you have ever bought free-range chicken or eggs, fair trade coffee or clothing, locally sourced produce, milk in a glass (instead of plastic) jug, or even researched which charity to patronize, then you have made a similar evaluation. Dismissing that as a "personal issue" is to trivialize the effects your decisions have on the world.
Personal issues are political ones, and a political science major like yourself should understand that.
And this is the crux of my disagreement. You know what prompts me to spend money on an author? Whether or not he's a good author.
I don't give a shit if he's Democrat or Republican, gay or straight, religious or atheist, male or female, philanderer or philanthropist, tall or short, fat or thin, etc.
Me buying a ticket for Ender's Game doesn't make me any more culpable for what Card does with the profit than you voting for Obama makes you responsible for the NSA spying on Germany.
As I said, this is clearly a personal issue for you and you behave accordingly; that's cool.
While I personally oppose a great many viewpoints espoused by this man, I still enjoyed the book and the film upon which it is based and have no compunction about paying him for my entertainment.
That's not saying much. One of my favorite comedy bits is when Brian Regan talks about how he despises the phrase "and one thing led to another."
"An aspiring painter named Adolf Hitler is rejected from art school and one thing led to another and the United States dropped two atomic bombs on Imperial Japan."
I dunno, if I knew Card was going to fund anti-gay stuff with the money he makes I probably wouldn't be inclined to give him any. It doesn't affect my enjoyment of the work, but it makes me not want to give him any money.
However, Moviebob says he won't get any money from proceeds so I have no problems going to see the movie.
Ugh this article, and your position, is so shortsighted.
I try not to throw around terms like "privilege" on this board but you just reek of it. OSC is not targeting you, and I get that. But the claim that examining his social policies is somehow an emotional reaction instead of a rational evaluation is condescending, smarmy, and awful. I've lost a little respect for you, I think. If he were targeting higher education, or future-life-employees of Starbucks then I'm sure you'd be up in arms.
The issue isn't that he's a bigot. I happily read Heinlein (misogynist) and Twain (racist) and even Dawkins (islamophobic), and all of these people are bigoted against some group. The issue is that OSC is an activist. Claiming that his activism is not enabled by his art is shortsighted.
While it's comforting that you'd be on my side if he wanted to shoot me, I'm very curious where the line between [activism] and [murder] should fall? Is it ok for him to refuse to hire any gay people? (Probably.) Is it ok for him to refuse to work with anyone who hires gay people? (Probably not as much.) Is it ok for him to actively tell people they aren't allowed to hire gay people? (No.) This continuum of harm can be extended. Judging the type of qualitative harm that you're willing to condone from OSC is a tacit endorsement of the harm up until that point.
Also, I hit level 51 with my SI, and got most of the Ragnos armor. I just need the robes proper which are about 350k at the marketplace and then the circle will be complete.
KMC Community Forums
Nov 14th, 2013 01:57 AM
