Why Orson Scott Card should not write Superman
by Philip R. Whigham
I’m not going to write a review in this post. Instead, I’m going to offer my opinion on a topic I feel very strongly about. I encourage you to join the conversation and I welcome all (especially differing) opinions.
For the upcoming reboot of The Adventures of Superman, DC has tapped a writer for the anthology series that I feel is highly inappropriate. Orson Scott Card is a well recognized award-winning science fiction author. I’m the only person I know who read his seminal sci-fi novel Ender’s Game and didn’t truly enjoy it.
I’m the first to admit I allowed my knowledge of Card’s personal views color my enjoyment of his work. I think it made me have a more critical eye for things I oppose, and I read into his work more than I would have had I not known. I saw what I wanted to: I found themes of racism and homophobia.
Orson Scott Card is a very active member of the Church of Latter-Day Saints (more familiarly known as Mormons.) The church has had a checkered past when it comes to race relations, and is still a vocal supporter of the repression of human rights in one particular area: the Mormons are anti-gay. The Church of Latter-Day Saints were the main proponents of California’s Prop. 8, the state law that would make gay marriage illegal. The fate of that vile piece of legislation is to be decided in The United States Supreme Court soon.
“So what?” you may say. This man certainly does have a right to his perverse and disgusting views. Go ahead, take a moment and review what Card thinks about the LGBT community. I’ll link his opinions here. Go on, read that… I’ll wait.
…
Did you enjoy the part where he tried to claim lack of context for critics of his view while still not reversing it a bit?
Perhaps you’ll enjoy his more “enlightened” view in 2004 featured here.
So why should this man not be allowed to ply his trade and make money writing The Adventures of Superman? It all has to do with the National Organization for Marriage. Orson Scott Card is a board member in this activist organization whose sole goal is to oppose marriage equality on all fronts. To not mince words: Orson Scott Card is a bigot who uses his personal money to stop Love.
This does not make his writing bad. Indeed, by all account his writing is pretty good. I’m not questioning DC’s artistic choice. I feel sci-fi writers are uniquely equipped to deal with a character like Superman.
What I do question is DC’s integrity as a company when it hires a writer whose actions directly counter the progress the publisher has made in regards to human rights. The company features several openly gay superheroes and artists. This man whom they’ve hired does not simply disagree with their human rights: he actively seeks to repress them.
If Orson Scott Card were a dues-paying member of the Ku Klux Klan, this would not be an issue.
I’m not expecting Card to be removed from the title. DC has already made it clear they won’t do so. I’m simply asking you: if you care at all for human rights, DO NOT BUY THIS COMIC. Show DC you will not support their choice to allow Orson Scott Card to write for them.
Albums, Beer, Comics. 
I agree. Superman is an outcast in a world of people not like him. He stands for what is right and just. So why have an author with opposing views of Superman, tell a story about superman?
That’s a good point. I don’t think he’s going to write a bad story, but at the same time, I think it’s a terrible misstep to give the company’s flagship character, a character who always does the right thing, especially when it’s hard, to a man who has a hate-filled agenda. I think it sends a bad message.
This is an interesting point. I liked Scott’s book, but I agree about the undertones. I’m not sure how I feel about supporting him or dis supporting him in writing this movie. For some reason, the studio chose him as a writer, either for style or for a fresher perspective. I do not think it’s entirely fair to say that because he’s associated with a particular crazy bunch of nut jobs that the movie will not be good. I hope that the studio has the final say as to the script.
I think he can tell a good Superman story. He probably will. I simply won’t financially support this book. Thanks for your thoughts!
So long as his agenda doesn’t seep into the narrative, he (sadly) has the right to chase his little hunk of the American dream. (I feel all smarmy even sayin’ that…I’m sure Hitler was a swell guy socially…”I’m a Vizz in Zee Keechin!! Look at Zee Zize uv mein Oven!!” …Ugh) Do I think it’s a good fit? You said it yourself, Sci-Fi writers have a unique aptitude for Supes as a character, I’m sure it’ll be an alright read, but, that said, I think Kal would probably have a problem NOT knocking him through a wall.
I truly hope he keeps his hate far away from Kal-El. Thanks for the insight, sir.
Until fairly recently, I’ve been a vocal supporter of the theory that an artist’s personal life and an artist’s product should be judged separately. Take Michael Jackson, for instance: the man’s life was (especially in his later years) a mess of controversy, embarrassment, and damaging rumors. Despite that, his PRODUCT–his music–was critically acclaimed, and showed no sign of having been influenced by his personal life. Thus, I could appreciate the artist, even if I snickered at the man.
However, Card has forced me to reevaluate this stance, since he breaks what I’ve come to think of as my sole caveat: Keep your personal views out of your work. As he’s chosen on several occasions to mix the two, and has, if anything, become even MORE vocal in his highly-polarizing views, I cannot in good conscience wear blinders when judging his work.
This doesn’t change my feelings about his EARLIEST works, which were written when his lack of celebrity status meant his opinions didn’t matter to many people, and didn’t carry very far, including (it seems to me) into his work. But now? His hiring by a company that’s put a fair amount of effort into showing progressive diversification, like the reintroduction of Alan Scott/Green Lantern, seems an odd choice, and one that may cost them some offended and alienated fans.
Excellently stated, sir. I’ve not read any of Card’s work, save Ender’s Game. I wasn’t aware his works were becoming more reflective of his views. Thanks for the feedback.