Wednesday Review: Invisible, edited by Jim C. Hines

Title: Invisible
Editor: Jim C. Hines
Genre: science fiction commentary
Price: $2.99 (ebook)
Publisher: Amazon Digital Services
ISBN: B00JND5RBW
Point of Sale: Amazon / B &N / Smashwords
Reviewed by: Chris Gerrib

A few months back, Alex Dally MacFarlane wrote an article suggesting that science fiction writers might want to include more than just Straight White Males in their stories.  What should have been as controversial as “you should bathe regularly” created an amazing swirl of controversy on the Internet.  Invisible is a response to that controversy.

Blogger, author and (full disclosure) personal friend Jim C. Hines is a Mark 1 Straight White Male.  However, he offered his blog to various people who wrote moving essays about being other than Straight White Male, and what it meant to them to read (or not read) of people who were more like them.  Jim then collected 13 of those essays into this slim ebook.

The essays are all exceptionally well-written, and speak powerfully to the experience of being Other, as well as the help one can get by reading the right book at the right age.  Writers varied from an albino (have you ever seen a not-evil albino in fiction?) to people of various genders, orientations and races.

As an author, I want to entertain people.  I want to affect them in some positive way.  Reading the essays in Invisible helped me better understand how to do that.  As a businessman, (and all writers should be people of business) Invisible pointed out that non-Straight White Males have money and are interested in science fiction.  Providing them characters they can identify with can be profitable.  As an artist who happens to be a Straight White Male, part of being a good artist is an ability to populate your book with other than clones of yourself.  Invisible gave me some thoughts on how to do just that.

If you want to be a writer, you should do yourself a favor and read Invisible.

On the Art vs. the Artist

This weekend I went to see ENDER'S GAME, the long-awaited film interpretation of Orson Scott Card's classic science fiction novel. 

I've made it no secret how much I've been looking forward to this movie, and how much I enjoyed reading the novel. The story relates how the boy genius Ender is psychologically manipulated by the war machine of his time to become a weapon of mass destruction. 

The movie is very well done, though like all screen adaptations it falls short of the subtlety and depth of the novel itself.  Still, Asa Butterfield is perfectly cast as Ender, and while I had doubts about seeing Harrison Ford in this movie, he did a good job too. The special effects are phenomenal, and it was especially interesting to see the three-dimensional weightless battle games come to life on screen.

When we got home after the show, I wanted to share some thoughts about the movie via Facebook.  Upon logging in, I came across a posted comment by a person who had decided they would never read ENDER'S GAME or see the movie because of Orson Scott Card's personal beliefs. 

Not really sure what the post was referring to, I did a Google search and discovered that Orson Scott Card is a fairly controversial figure because, among other issues, he disapproves of same-sex relationships and has campaigned against same-sex marriage.  This has cost him in his following, and has led to a movement to boycott the book and the movie. 

As much as I agree with those who criticize Orson Scott Card's attitudes toward homosexuality, I was a little taken aback by the boycott movement.  The situation reminded me at once of THE GOLDEN COMPASS by Philip Pullman. 

One of the best YA fantasy stories I've ever read, THE GOLDEN COMPASS features a wonderful, complex, intelligent, and feisty heroine in the person of Lyra Silvertongue. It was adapted to the screen and released in 2007. Though extremely well done, the movie got nowhere in the market place.

Why?  In part because Pullman is an atheist. Because of this campaigns were run to boycott his books and his movie.  When returns on the movie were less than ideal, the option of filming the sequels was quietly dropped. 

Now, many would argue that homophobia is much more objectionable than atheism. Personally, I would have to agree, but that is not the debate I am interested in having today.

What I really want to ask is this:

When we reject an author's work because of his or her personal beliefs, does that put us on a higher moral ground than them?  Or does it merely bring us down to the same level of intolerance? 

Have at it, friends and followers of Heroines of Fantasy.  I'm very curious to hear your thoughts. 

-Posted by Karin Rita Gastreich