Orson Scott Card and the limits of tolerance

I don’t mean to come off as a right wing crank but this statement baffles me:

Orson is a powerful and accomplished writer who deeply believes everything he says. He has even thought it through, I am sure, though this does not excuse him. But he is working with preconceived notions, emotional ideas rooted deeply in his upbringing and his religious beliefs, and letting these rule his writing. It’s sad, and it’s painful.

So wisdom involves throwing out preconceived notions, deeply rooted ideas, and religious beliefs? Writing from this perspective is sad and painful? This is a textbook example of the limits of tolerance in our PC world. One can posit almost any loony idea or lifestyle and we are expected to be tolerant. The libertine view is pushed on everyone, if you don’t like something don’t watch, read, or pay attention to it. Very little is left to be taboo or out of bounds these days, but if your deeply rooted ideas and religious beliefs cause you to oppose gay marriage than you are sad and painful like a crazy uncle.

In this world we are all to be free of preconceived notions, stereotypes, prejudices, tradition, habits, etc. Only what is defensible through pure logic and science is to be valued. Seems rather intolerant if you ask me . . .

Okay, maybe I am a right wing crank . . .

About the author

Kevin Holtsberry

I work in communications and public affairs. I try to squeeze in as much reading as I can while still spending time with my wife and two kids (and cheering on the Pittsburgh Steelers and Michigan Wolverines during football season – oh, and watching golf too).

View all posts

3 Comments

  • No, she’s a secularist crank; the narrow-escape-from-fundies meme is a standard stock-in-trade of the literary crowd.

    I think the writer is ripping into her “narrow” Mormon youth more than she’s ripping into conservatism. She seems to be almost the caracature of the child-of-“fundamentalists” who grew up to become a secular liberal and love to make snide remarks of how backward they were as kids.

    By the way, feel free to combine both blogs; that way, I don’t have to click twice to see what you’re mind’s up to.

  • Although really what’s questionable about the statement you’ve quoted is the idea a writer shouldn’t be working with “”preconceived notions, emotional ideas rooted deeply.” What else is a writer (or anyone else) to work with? If those notions and ideas go completely without reflection or examination, that would be a different story.