What does /lit/ think of the Enders game sequels?
>implying /lit/fags think
Speaker for the Dead is the best of the four. Unfortunately the next two go progressively downhill. It feels like Card simultaneously wrote himself a dilemma he didn't know how to get out of while also getting distracted by other ideas that should have been saved for separate books.
>>25411904> other ideas that should have been saved for separate booksIf you read his afterwords he's not shy about telling you the Ender sequels had nothing to do with Ender, and were all separate ideas for other books. His publisher realized that's not how you sell books, so he forced Ender into the narrative, and clearly does not give a shit. Even Speaker of the Dead, which at least seems to follow from the first book, had nothing to do with it in the original conception. What he's interested in is the concept of 'speaking for the dead', which is bizarre since it's woefully underdeveloped in the story. Again, this isn't my hot take, this is what he says.Card doesn't actually try writing a real sequel until he goes back and starts retconning with Ender's Shadow.
>>25411904I really enjoyed Speaker for the Dead, though I didn't go deeper into the series.Ender's Game seemed like a gimmick, t.b.h. The "surprise" ending was painfully obvious, simply because of the length of the book.
>>25411950>starts retconning with Ender's ShadowI honestly believe Card still doesn't understand 'Ender's Game' in the way that its fans do or he would never have written 'Shadow.' -- How often does art exceed the artist?
