Ender’s Game question

I think people tend to gravitate towards the first title in a series... it makes sense, it's the one that drew them in, got them hooked. And it's where they were introduced to the characters. All in all nostalgia tends to trump a lot of things.

I personally thought both Speaker for the Dead and Xenocide were better books. They had much more thought provoking ideas in them, and when it comes to a series I tend to like it when all the introductions and world building is done and you can really start getting to the meat of things.

That said I didn't like Children of the Mind as much (I felt like he was getting too preachy by then) and I couldn't even make it through any of the Shadow books (Couldn't really say why... just redundant to me).

Ender's Game is a great story that improves with age due to a focus on morality vs. technology. There are many layers to the story, starting with a kid's story about little kids who are smarter than mean bullies and overseeing adults and who play interesting games. But the story is ultimately a morality tale about the human race's willingness to be ruthless when convinced it is necessary for survival. The reader is left to judge the correctness of the application of ruthlessness in this situation. History is filled with unjust ruthlessness, but we are all descendants of humans who did what was necessary to survive.

To put it simply, Ender's Game raises questions and leaves them up to the reader to think about them, while in the following books OSC presents his own philosophy and answers to such questions - since OSC is a highly intelligent writer, this second approach is also interesting, but much less interesting and much less intelectually challenging than EG. I would much more call the following books in the series YA literature than EG.

In my opinion Ender's Game is much more complex in its simplicity, better and deeper than the following books in the series. Much more subtility both in the story and in the characters - only not so pronounced, leaving it up to the reader to find them, to relate to his/her own experience and knowledge. It raises many questions, have many depth and subtility, and as the author doesn't try to preach and spoonfeed you his opinion, you are intrigued into finding them and thinking about them. And that is when you really realize how solid the book is on a logical and psichological level.

The following books in the series (I've read Speaker of the Dead and Xenocide, hesitating about reading Children of the mind) are much more direct. The author and his personal views and philosophy are much more involved in there and so much less is left up to the reader. You get the authors philosophy and answers readied for you, and to that end characters sometimes made go extreme to emphasise the intended points - I got sometimes really annoyed by the members of the Ribeira family.

For me the key thing is that Ender isn't great because he is a marvelous tactician. Bean is clearly shown to be a younger and more gifted tactician than Ender. It's not that Ender is the "toughest" or the "most dangerously cunning"...

He is great because of his tremendous capacity for empathy. That is his (and humanity's) most significant adaptation. It allows us to see another beings point of view. To find understanding. To truly forge connections with other beings. This is the strongest theme in the books. And since it isn't about war and explosions and nifty sci-fi action - most people don't get into it as much.

Ender's empathy leads him to his tragic mistake, but it also allows for his (and humanities) greatest redemption.

When I first read the 2nd book, I wasn't expecting it at all. I think some folks want more of the same thing, and I think that is why the shadow books were written.

I thought the last 3 books were all great. EG was a good book, and an engrossing read. But definitely the weakest of the 4. Without the character development of the latter books, EG seems to be mostly about manipulation, the childhood fascination with violence and war/games, and the under-dog/chosen one fantasy. A cunning character overcoming odds to "win the big game". Classic power-fantasy stuff. Executed well, but without the redemption of Ender in the 2nd/3rd book, and Peter in the last book, it isn't much to go on about.

As others have said, most people who really love the first book probably are into the power-fantasy element, and don't care for the deeper things. I would hope that any kid I gave the first book to, would go on to read the others and gain some insight. I know for me, the last 3 books had lots of valuable ideas in them that I've not seen in other books.

I believe it may be that we get to meet Ender and build that bond with him, rather than the other books we don't get that emotion and just the drastic change in his life from Ender's Game to Speaker for the Dead, the style almost seems completely different, and we may be used to the style Ender's Game was written in (as myself) I believe it is the strong bond between the characters.

For me the dialogue, the character interactions and the null gravity room were the shining diamonds of EG.It was crafted such that I enjoy reading it every few years. Speaker for the Dead, while seriously in depth, broke my heart on so many levels that I vowed to never read it again. I detest unrequited love stories. And the fact that Ender's wife chose celibacy in Xenocide really honked me off. It's probably shallow of me, but I read to escape the doldrums and sad stories of real life. I don't really want to study philosophy when I read a book; I want happy endings and I want them yesterday.

"Considered" by whom? Blank-out.

I found that Ender's Game was really the only book in the ender quartet that was meant for a younger audience. Being that younger audience myself, I thought Ender's Game was better than Xenocide and Children of the Mind. However, Speaker for the Dead is, and will continue to be my favorite of the four, and possibly my favorite book of all time. It was so deep and thought provoking, meaning it was unlike any teenage love story trash book that people assume you want to read. I think Ender's Game was really an astounding book, but the concept and moral lessons just differed from the rest of the quartet. I found that I appreciated Ender's Game more after I read Ender's Shadow. It really gave me a sense of what battle school and ender's journey were really like through a different perspective. Also, reading Ender in Exile helped me understand Speaker a little better than when I first read it after Ender's Game. In my opinion Speaker was by far the best book in the quartet, but I think some people might say the first is better because they want to hang on to their favorite character, or they just didn't really understand the depth of the other novels.

I like the concept of Ender's Game and Ender as a character, but structurally I feel like Ender's Game is very weak. There are points that I wish were more fleshed out and then other points like the end that just drag on and on and on. Speaker for the Dead is my favorite, because I feel like he really manages to weave together several stories in a delightfully surprising way and while the end is sad, it is also satisfying. The plotting and pacing are good and you never feel like you're missing out on something or wasting time. We also get more into the heads of the supporting characters in SftD where in Ender's Game they always felt very one-dimensional to me. Mostly I guess people probably just think a "sequel" to Ender's Game is going to be about a kid still and it's jarring when they meet this full-grown, fairly well-adjusted man and a whole slew of new characters.

People are so dumb now days they can't stand books that make you think!

Because the other books in the series are boring!!!!!!!!!!!

I exaggerate, but could it be because kids love watching the same thing over and over and over again?

Probably because most people read EG when they're young kids and arent very critical of what they read, so part of how much we love it is based on nostalgia. It also has more universal appeal than the rest of the series.

I would say because it's the only book in the series that is original, whereas just about all the rest were merely reiterations of the original book. Between all the sequels, prequels, and so-called interquels he wrote, it seemed like he was simply trying to recapture the success of Ender's Game, which should have been a standalone novel.

I'd say that it sucks plot-wise for the entire enderverse, but in terms of the feel, it's one of the best. Children of the mind, shadow of the giant, and shadows in flight are definitely tied for first in my book.

I don't understand all the worshipful praise about Ender's Game; I thought it was good, but not wonderful, and I only found Speaker for the Dead to rise up into the lower tiers of "greatness."

EG and its related books are probably OSC's best work, but in the realm of sf series, I'd pick Dan Simmon's "Hyperion" series every day and twice on Sunday.

I tried Seventh Son. Not impressed.

Hi, it's been a while since I have read the Ender's Game series. But I remember thinking that the books following Ender's Game in the series were much more philosophical and geared towards adults rather than children. Ender's Game, on the other hand, while provoking deep questions about violence vs. nonviolence, understanding diverse perspectives, autonomy, etc., is still an adolescent novel that is written at a low reading level. I think that that fact makes it more accessible to a wider audience-- especially with the current teen fiction craze. Ender's Game also has a lot of action in it and a very direct epic hero plot line (that many people are addicted to).

I think a lot of people, when they read Ender's Game, fall in love with the concepts and characters and walk into the other novels expecting more of the same. But Speaker For The Dead was originally written not as an Ender novel. When Ender's Game took off like a rocket and won all the awards, Card changed the main character to be Ender. So, Speaker is a very different novel from Ender's Game. I remember when I read it just after it came out, I liked it very much, but it definitely wasn't what I was expecting from a sequel. I think the series, as a result, took a very different trajectory than it would have, had Card started Speaker as a direct sequel. I think it was good he didn't because it probably forced him to go much deeper into the characters to make it work.

I actually think I have to agree with you - well to a point - I actually didn't get a chance to read the final (Children of the MInd), although I did read most of the Bean installment too.

I think Ender's game was remarkable but I think that Xenocide and Speaker for the Dead were far more dimensional and really drew you in to understand a more developed Ender and the people around him (such as his family).