Jan 11 2013 5:00pm

The Gate Thief (Excerpt)

The Gate Thief, Orson Scott Card's sequel to The Lost Gate, is coming out on March 19—but we've got a special excerpt for you now:

In this sequel to The Lost Gate, bestselling author Orson Scott Card continues his fantastic tale of the Mages of Westil who live in exile on Earth.

Here on Earth, Danny North is still in high school, yet he holds in his heart and mind all the stolen outselves of thirteen centuries of gatemages. The Families still want to kill him if they can't control him…and they can't control him. He is far too powerful.

And on Westil, Wad is now nearly powerless—he lost everything to Danny in their struggle. Even if he can survive the revenge of his enemies, he still must somehow make peace with the Gatemage Daniel North.

For when Danny took that power from Loki, he also took the responsibility for the Great Gates. And when he comes face-to-face with the mages who call themselves Bel and Ishtoreth, he will come to understand just why Loki closed the gates all those centuries ago.



Flying Children


On a certain day in November, in the early afternoon, if you had just parked your car at Kenney’s burger place in Buena Vista, Virginia, or maybe you were walking into Nick’s Italian Kitchen or Todd’s Barbecue, you might have cast your gaze up the hill toward Parry McCluer High School. It could happen. You have to look somewhere, right?

You might have noticed something shooting straight up out of the school. Something the size and shape of, say, a high school student. Arms waving, maybe. Legs kicking—count on that. Definitely a human being.

Like a rocket, upward until he’s a mile above Buena Vista. He hangs in the air for just a moment. Long enough to see and be seen.

And then down he goes. Straight down, and not falling, no, shooting downward just as fast as he went up. Bound to kill himself at that speed.

You can’t believe you saw it. So you keep watching for a moment longer, a few seconds, and look! There it is again! Too far away to be sure whether it’s the same kid or a different one. But if you’ve got someone with you, you grab them, you say, “Look! Is that a person? Is that a kid?”


“In the sky! Above the high school, look up, I’m saying straight up, you seeing what I’m seeing?”

Down comes the kid, plummeting toward the school.

“He’s got to be dead,” you say. “Nobody could live through that.”

And there it is again! Straight up! “That’s one hell of a trampoline,” somebody says.

If you noticed it early enough, you’d see it repeated about thirty times. And then it stops.

Do you think they’re dead? I don’t know, how could anybody live through that? Should we go up and see? I’m not even sure it was people, it could have been, like, dummies or something. We’d sound so stupid—hey, you got a bunch of kids getting catapulted straight up and then smashing down again? It can’t be what it looked like. Maybe we’ll see it on the news tonight.

Three different people got it on their smartphones. Not the whole thing, but the last five or six, and one guy got fifteen of them. High quality video it wasn’t, but that actually made it more credible. All three videos got emailed to people. All three ended up on YouTube.

Lots of comments: “Fake.” “Why do people bother making crap like this?” “You can see that the lighting’s different on the flying dummies.” “Cool. Something new and fun to do with your old G.I. Joe’s.” The usual.

The local news stations aren’t all that local. Lynchburg. Roanoke. Staunton. They don’t give a rat’s ass about Buena Vista— the town never amounted to anything even before it died, that’s what people think in the big city. If those are big cities.

And the footage is so implausible, the flying figures so tiny that it wouldn’t look like anything on TV screens. Besides, the fliers were so high that at the top, all you can see is a dot in the sky, not even the mountains. So it’s sky, clouds, and a dot—makes no sense. Has to be a bird. Has to be a trick of the light. So it doesn’t get on the news.

But scattered through the world, there are a few thousand people who know exactly what could cause those kids to fly. Straight up, straight down, incredibly fast and yet no news stories about dead kids at a Virginia high school. Oh, yeah, it makes sense to them, all right.

It’s an act of a god. No, not an “act of God,” to use the weaselout-of-it words in insurance policies. Not God. A god.

Or at least people used to call them gods, in the old days, when Zeus and Mercury and Thor and Vishnu and Borvo and Mithra and Pekelnik were worshiped wherever Indo-European languages were spoken.

Nobody called them gods anymore, but they were still around. Weaker now, because they could no longer pass through the Great Gates that used to carry them from Earth to Westil and back again, greatly magnifying their powers.

Only a gatemage could send someone from one place to another instantaneously, but there hadn’t been a gatemage since 632 A.D., when the last Loki of the Norse destroyed all the gates on Earth, disappearing through the last Great Gate and closing it behind him.

In the North Family compound, only a few miles away from Buena Vista, one of the kids spotted the longest YouTube video only a few hours after it went up on the web, and within twenty minutes the most powerful mages in the family piled into a pickup truck and headed for the high school. They knew it was Danny North who had done it, Danny the son of Odin and Gerd, a boy who had seemed to be drekka until one day he up and disappeared.

Now they knew that he hadn’t gone as far as they thought. Now they knew he wasn’t drekka at all, but a gatemage. And a strong one. Because the video didn’t show somebody suddenly appearing in the air, which is how gates usually worked. No, the flying figures could be seen as they moved upward. They were moving fast, yes, but it wasn’t instantaneous. They rose into the air, visible the whole way.

That meant it wasn’t just any gate. It was an attempt at a Great Gate. A spiral intertwining of many gates at once, rising straight up from the surface of the Earth. And even if it only reached a mile into the air, it was one more mile of Great Gate than had existed in nearly fourteen centuries.

Here’s the thing. Some of the gods on that pickup truck were heading for Parry McCluer High School in order to find Danny North and kill him. Because that’s what you did with gatemages—they brought nothing but trouble down on the Family, and if the Norths had a gatemage and allowed him to live, all the other Families would unite against them and this time they wouldn’t be allowed to survive the war that was bound to start.

The Norths had to be able to show Danny’s dead body to the other Families—it was their only hope of survival. If history had taught them nothing else, it taught them that.

But other gods on that truck had a different plan entirely. Danny’s father and mother had known perfectly well that Danny was a gatemage—it was in hopes of creating a gatemage that Gerd and Alf had married each other back before Alf became head of the Family and took the name Odin. The two most powerful mages in generations: lightmage Gerd with her power over electricity and light; stonemage Alf, with his strange new talent for getting inside the workings of metal machines. Everyone expected a child of theirs to be extraordinarily talented.

But Gerd and Alf had studied the genealogical tables and they knew that gatemages, rare as they were, came most often to couples with very different affinities. Like stone and lightning, or water and fire. And never to beastmages. So they hoped. And when Danny showed no sign of being able to do magery, or even raise a clant—even the most minimal abilities—they hoped even more. Because yes, he might have been drekka, worthless, devoid of power; but he might also be a gatemage, unable to raise a clant because his outself was fragmented into all the potential gates that he could make in his life.

And a year ago, when Danny ran away, Thor had used his clant to converse with Danny before he got too far away, and had confirmed that yes, Danny was making gates and yes, Danny finally knew what he was.

So the gods on that truck were evenly divided between those intending to murder Danny before he could make a gate and get away, and those determined to enlist his power in the service of the Family.

They got there too late. Danny had already made a Great Gate, and the Gate Thief hadn’t eaten his gates. Danny had friends—Orphans who didn’t belong to any Family—and some of them had passed through the Great Gate and returned. It made their power irresistible. The Norths were sent home in utter and ignominious defeat.

But none of them had been killed. It was a good sign that Danny and his friends had refrained from doing any serious damage. They still might be able to work something out—especially if they eliminated the faction of the North family that still wanted Danny dead. Times have changed, Uncle Zog! We can’t kill our gatemage, Grandpa Gyish!

We have to get Danny to let us pass through a Great Gate! You saw how powerful his friends became—a Cowsister took your eagle right out of the sky, Zog! A mere Cobblefriend was able to open up a rift in the ground and swallow our truck! Imagine what Odin will do with his power over metal and machinery, what Gerd will do with electricity, when they pass through a Great Gate.

And imagine what the other Families will do to us if Danny lets any of them through a Great Gate before us. No, that’s not a reason to kill him—how will we even get near him now? He’s warned, he’s ready, he’ll just gate away from us. You know the stories. The winged feet of Mercury, seven-league boots—gatemages can be gone before your attack comes close to them. Or they can suddenly appear behind you and kill you before you turn around.

Gatemages are slippery! Once they come into their power, you can’t kill them. Even if you sneak up on them somehow, passing through a gate heals any wound. We’re no threat to a gatemage. We need him—alive and on our side. So we have to talk to Danny. Appeal to his family loyalty.

And if you can’t stop trying to kill him, then we’ll have no choice but to put you in Hammernip Hill. For the good of the family.

You understand, yes, you do—you’d do it yourself. There’s a gatemage in the world, one who created a Great Gate and wasn’t destroyed by the Gate Thief. And that gatemage is our own Danny. He knows us, he grew up among us. He has roots in our garden. We need to play that up. We need to bring him back to us. Not irritate him with foolish attempts to murder him. Get it? Are you going to leave him alone? Keep him safe? Make friends with him?

Yes, you say so now, but can we trust you? Stay away from him. Let Odin and Gerd do the negotiating. Or Thor. Or Mook and Lummy. People he likes and trusts. Don’t let him see you. We want him to forget all the nasty things you did to him growing up.


The Norths weren’t the only Family that spotted those YouTube videos—they were just the closest. The Illyrians, for instance, were already aware that there was a gatemage in the North Family. That’s why they were spying on the Norths constantly.

And when their own gatefinder, Hermia, went missing, their suspicions were confirmed. For a while, they thought the Norths’ gatemage had killed her—gated her to the bottom of the ocean, for instance, or out into space. But then one of their clants had spotted her, still very much alive, and she was using the gates.

Now the YouTube videos confirmed that the Norths’ gatemage was powerful—a Gatefather, able to raise a Great Gate all by himself, or perhaps drawing partly on Hermia’s abilities—and it was time to get Hermia back under Family control. Chances were good that the Norths’ gatemage could be turned, recruited into the Argyros Family. Hermia was their tool to accomplish that. To get Illyrian mages to Westil and back again.

Once mages were restored to their full power, who could stand against them?

Left to themselves for fourteen centuries, the drekka had made a mess of things, and they were only getting worse. It was time for Earth to be ruled by gods again.


The Gate Thief © Orson Scott Card 2013

Merchanter Pride
1. MerchanterPride
It sorta makes me sad to see you good people pushing Card's books. Of course I adore Ender's Game as much as the next nerd, but given his radical commitment to extraordinary public and poisonous bigotry in the last twenty years--perhaps most extraordinarily through the execrable Hamlet's Father! But also through his general public positions and political advocacy--hasn't he sorta forfeited his claim on our affections? (This is distinct from the fact that all the books he's written in the last fifteen years or so are unreadable dross.)

I love, it's a community where I feel very comfortable. Which is sensible, since geekdom itself is the biggest of all tents. Geekdom is a vastly nonlocal place founded on otherness, a sociality emergent from a common desire to find in some passion or set of passions a consolation for a world all too often cold and closed to ways of life or kinds of mind departing from the accepted standard. The fundamental characteristic of the geek is a kind of serious, defining love, so we tend to accept all kinds of love.

So it makes me a little sad to see on the front page of this awesome place at the heart of geekery a giddy announcement about another dreadful book by this dreadful man. Don't you think? Maybe you don't. I do.
Dirk Walls
2. dirk
Boo, hiss!

Thanks,, for reminding all the readers here that, in the end, profit is all that matters to you.
3. Immo
I dont agree with his views but I did like The Lost Gate and intend to buy The Gate Thief.
4. Iarvin
Its rather unfair to blame Tor for not boycotting an author because he's taken stances on very controversial issues. . . they would have to boycott pretty much any outspoken author in that case just in case one of their readers disagreed with the authors views.

On topic, it seems like a fun enough take on the question of where the gods went.
5. wizard clip
I'm not particularly a fan of Card's fiction, and I find many of the views he's expressed repugnant, but I am a fan of free and open access to literature.

And yes, is motivated by profits. Is this a shock to anyone? I know many of us might like to view this site as our own little geek clubhouse, but in the end exists largely to promote the publisher's product.

Lot's of creative, talented people hold vile beliefs or, worse, engage in vile behavior. Roman Polanski is a rapist (but I'll still watch Chinatown). Warren Zevon was a wife beater who tricked one of his extramarital young lovers into having an abortion (but I'll still listen to his songs when they come on the radio). I suppose we all draw our own lines in the sand when it comes to this sort of thing, but if we can't cultivate an appreciation for an artist's work seperate from his or her "civilian" life, we're going to miss out on a great deal of important work (it's up to individuals to decide if Card's work qualifies as "important" in any way).

If you don't like Card or his writing, then don't read it. He is an ignoramous and his ideas are offensive; almost as offensive as someone who tries to tell other people what they should be able to read or a publisher what they should be able to publish
6. Freelancer
Lovely snippet.

Dear folks at Tor, you should be encouraged by the preceding comments. Yes, those who are intolerant of an authors personal views would want you to not tolerate that author, but they would rage against you for anything less than tolerating their intolerance. Let them have their hypocrisy.

Stick by your guns, and publish what you believe ought to be published. And never let your motivation be diluted by anything which does not promote profit.
Melissa Shumake
7. cherie_2137
i don't like all of his books, but card isn't a bad author, but any stretch. and, while i don't like his methods for dealing with things he finds distasteful by way of his religion, i don't think he's probably a bad person either. to me, it's mostly an argument for buying his books used. then a local bookstore profits, and not him.
"Actually I quite liked it!" And with those words, Arthur Dent established an entirely new style of literary criticism ...

"Facetiously", Card has the good quality of saying what he believes. He also writes well. That said, I've only read one book of that series of his that gets such a bad press - I think his Alvin Maker is perhaps one of the best American fantasy series anyone's written, because it is based on American folklore instead of half-digested European folklore, myth and so.

I personally think that what I've read about some of his political, social, religious etc, views, indicates he and I would be political enemies; but I've met him, and in person he doesn't seem a bad chap.

I intend to buy the Lost Gate and the Gate Thief, because the excerpts I've read so far I've enjoyed.

Indexed Sequential Access Methods (ISAM)
10. Jonathan M
It really is unfortunate that Tor continues to publish, publicise and legitimise the views of a man who has said that gay people should be thrown in jail as a deterrent to other GLBT people.

It is sad that, as a community, genre has failed to take a stand against this type of thing but Tor and's continued support for a politically active homophone really is utterly intolerable.
11. Jonathan M
Or indeed 'Homophobe'. I'm far less intolerant of people who merely sound like men.
12. Freelancer
So you employ your access to the First Amendment to curse his. Tor also publishes works from authors who are openly anti-Semitic and anti-Christian, do you care, or are you a single-issue intolerant, otherwise known as a hypocrite?

You would probably laugh out loud if you read of someone's similar call for Hollywood to boycott the employment of actors who have shameful political views or dissolute lifestyles (partially because that would nearly empty the town of potential workers), and forcefully argue that one need not agree with anything the actor thinks or says publicly to enjoy their work on-screen. That would be a double-standard, and you would be a hypocrite.

But hey, nice recovery on the typo.
Merchanter Pride
13. MerchanterPride
One of the great American problems I think is that people who espouse a commitment to the Constitution have not even the least understanding of what it means; the most salient example of this of course is the preposterous reliance on the First Amendment in discussions of private action. Do I want the government to suppress this dude's appallingly ill-written books? Never! I'd rebel! Does that anti-censorship position have any meaningful implication for my preferences about how private actors should treat positions I find detestable? Not in the least.

Nor am I asking Tor to stop printing his books for this reason, because I think that's pretty bad too; I'd be quite angry if they did. Any more than I think La Scala should stop producing Der Ring, though I think anti-Semitism is a very awful and grotesque thing. (Sidenote: Tor publishes people who are openly anti-Semitic? Who are they?)

But I do think, when we're discussing the work of someone who holds--and works to accomplish--evil positions about public affairs, that we can't ignore the evil positions any more than we can ignore the work. The product can't be distinct from the producer and the producer's environment.

Roman Polanski is a brilliant filmmaker. I don't think his extraordinary skills provide a justification for the battalions of entertainment folks who defend him for being a literal child rapist. I don't think we should stop watching Chinatown either. But it's not an intellectually sustainable position to watch Chinatown without a consciousness that this remarkable piece of art was produced by an actual child rapist, and thinking about what that means.

Just the same way, if we're going to have Card's books on the front page of one of the major sites in the genre world, I think it's incumbent on us to have a little conversation about what it means that we're celebrating his work.

Of course it feels a little ridiculous to be having a conversation which mentions Roman Polanski in the same breath as Orson Scott Card, who is a hack at best. And Alvin Maker... gosh. Now there is some horrible writing. Vacant characters, clumsy action, stone-dull dialogue, pacing like an anthropology paper.
14. ckspores
So wait, because YOU don't like his political views, Tor (or anyone else) should never publish or print anything by or about him ever again? Nor should anyone who happens to enjoy his fiction read anything by him again?

I do not agree with his personal politics but I like his books and, for that reason alone, I appreciate Tor moving away from the personal messiness and providing a nice preview of an antipated title. If Tor stayed away from every author with an opinion (because let's face it, no one is going to be 100% happy with someone's opinions) no one would be left.

Despite the controversial nature of his opinions, he is entitled to them. If you don't like him personally or as a writer then don't read his stuff. But stop suggesting that no one should have the opportunity.
Merchanter Pride
15. MerchanterPride
@14, I think I said the exact opposite of what you suggest in your first paragraph. At least I was trying to, and I apologize if I seem to have suggested otherwise. On the contrary, I don't think anyone should stop reading him because of his political views, nor should Tor stop publishing him. I'm just saying I think it's important and maybe essential, if his stuff is going to be published and read, to have a conversation like this as part of the enterprise of publishing and reading his stuff.

So just to be clear: I'm not advocating for government censorship, private censorship, or reader boycott. Just accurate context. And I'm emphasizing why I think it's especially important to provide that context in a place like this, which I think is sort of founded on a proposition of equality and inclusion, when the problematic views in question are expressions of a premise of hated and exclusion.

Again, I want to be very clear about that position, which is just that I want us to be up-front and express about what it means for an inclusive community to publish and promote a bigot.

It's worth comparing this position with what the dude himself wrote about the possibility of legal same-sex marriage in this country: "Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down... If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die."
16. Jonathan M
@12 Firstly, I don't have any protection under the first ammendment as I'm not American.

Secondly, the first ammendment protects people from being thrown in jail by the government for their views. The ammendment does not extend to who does and does not get publishing deals and so it really doesn't have any relevance to Tor's continued support of a homophobic activist such as Card.

By continuing to both publish and publicise the works of a noted homophobe, Tor are not only legitimising his views, they are also normalising a culture that tolerates the persecution of GLBT people. That is reprehensible but it is no more reprehensible than all of those cons, magazines and blogs that have provided Card with a platform over the years. At the end of the day, you either tolerate homophobia or you accept that GLBT people are normal humans who are worthy of both respect and equal treatment. History will look upon Card as well as his publishers and fans and deem them morally backward and politically reactionary. By continuing to publish Card, Tor are a part of America's homophobia problem.
Matthew Smith
17. Blocksmith1
Jonathan M

I am extremely confused by your position. I personally think Card is a quality author. Not one of my favorites but good. I truly enjoyed Ender's Game.

What I am confused by is your stance on Tor. Card is entitled to his personal opinion on any number of issues. And he certainly can put those ideas in his work should he so choose. But Tor only stands to lose both other authors and readers by selectively deciding which authors to publish based on their political/religious/social views. What if they decided not to publish LBGT authors and works because people posted and wrote that that Tor should not do such a thing? I would prefer that publishers do their job and get books out there and let the public decide which authors make a living or fail based on the quality of their work. You certainly have the choice to purchase the book or not. Get the word out, tell your friends, start a movement. But don't disparage a publisher for printing a book. That begins to tread on thin ice over censorship lake.

And going out on a limb, a homophobe is someone that hates gay/lesbian people. There are many people that don't believe that lifestyle is appropriate because of their religious views or other upbringing, that doesn't make them homophobes.
18. fatstupidweasel
I'm going to join the chorus here. As Gardner famously said, sometimes someone is a better person when they are making their art than when they are living their life. This is certainly true in Card's case, his fiction can be very good but he is a famous and unrepentant bigot of the first water toward queer folks, in the most direct way imaginable shy direct action. I'd say we should enjoy whatever he manages to write during his life after he's been mouldering in his grave for a few years, but of course that isn't how the world works. In the meantime -- yeah, I don't want to be supporting this guy. He does real harm to the most vulnerable among us. I wish tor weren't supporting him in any way.
19. Jonathan M
@17 Orson Scott Card has said the following about homosexuality:
The dark secret of homosexual society… is how many homosexuals first entered into that world through a disturbing seduction or rape or molestation or abuse.
Laws against homosexual behavior should remain on the books, not to be indiscriminately enforced against anyone who happens to be caught violating them, but to be used when necessary to send a clear message that those who flagrantly violate society's regulation of sexual behavior cannot be permitted to remain as acceptable, equal citizens within that society.
These are not the views of someone who just happens to be a mainstream Republican or a member of a homophobic religious group, this is someone who has looed at American society and calmly decided that the government needs to start locking up GLBTs to set an example to the others. In the eyes of Orson Scott Card, gay, lesbian, bi and transgendered people can never be equal because their behaviour can never be acceptable.

That is ugly, toxic stuff and the only reason Orson Scott Card's views receive any attention is because he's an author with a big following and a support from a major publishing house. By refusing to take a stand against people like Card, both the SF community and its publishers are normalising both the marginalisation and the persecution of GLBT people.
20. wizard clip
@MerchantPride: There was nothing in your original post that suggested you were interested in a discussion of how an artist's social or politicial attitudes should affect our consumption of his or her work. You seemed to suggest that Tor and the SF/fantasy reading community should totally ostracize Card because of his views, period, no discussion involved.

As to whether Card should be mentioned in the same breath as Polanski, well, that's totally subjective. As I said, I don't care for most of Card's work, but some of it has earned a fair amount of critical acclaim, for what it's worth. Incidentally, should our acceptance or rejection of the creator in question be in proportion to the actual harm done by the individual? Some may argue, but it seems to me the actual rape of a child (the one we know about) trumps the vile bloviations of a hateful loudmouth.

@Jonathan M: You're engaging in simplistic, either-or thinking. I utterly embrace LGBT individuals as part of American society, with all of the rights that entails. I also tolerate homophobia, along with a host of other hateful attitudes, because this is America, and, as someone once said, I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. When the issue is raised, I will speak out against prejudice and bigotry. I can also respect someone's right to articulate an opposing perspective without respecting the perspective itself.

You mentioned that you're not American. Since I don't know where you're from, I don't know what the status of gay people's rights is in your country, nor do I know what your country's laws are regarding prejudicial language. I know that in some European countries people can actually be brought before a judge for saying something that offends a member of a minority group (thought police, anyone?). Thank goddness that isn't happening here. Yet.

As far as America's "homophobia problem" goes, again, I don't know what your perceptions are based on, but don't let it be shaped by right-wing media blowhards or the politicians who pander to them and their audience. American society has evolved radically over the last decade and a half when it comes to this issue, becoming much more egalitarian, moreso, in fact, than some European countries.
Irene Gallo
21. Irene
Hi Guys,

There has been lots of talk here, and elsewhere on, about Card as an individual. There are plenty of other places to continue that discussion on the internet. Let’s turn this thread back on topic and keep the focus on The Gate Thief from here out.

22. AustralianReader
ON topic...

I have to say I was disappointed with this excerpt.

Don't get me wrong, I read The Lost Gate (loved it), and I will be buying The Gate Thief when it comes out (really looking forward to it), but this was just a bad choice for an excerpt.

Normally when I read an excerpt from a new novel, I get to read a little bit about the novel - often a chapter that has new/interesting stuff (a great example would be the many excerpts provided from the Wheel of Time novels)

But this excerpt tells you nothing. I would guess it is the first chapter of the book, but this is just the "recap of book 1 for people who didn't read it". There is nothing new going on here. If you read a spoiler summary of The Lost Gate on Wikipedia, it would probably say the same as this excerpt.

So, in summary, I am really looking forward to The Gate Thief', and really disappointed with this excerpt.

23. Jonathan M
@21 But Irene... we are discussing the book. We're discussing the fact that the book is written by a homophobic activist and that both Tor and are choosing to support a noted homophobic activist by continuing to publish his works.

If you don't like people discussing Card's political activities and the fact that his actions reflect badly upon Tor, maybe you should have a word with your boss about the decision to publish him.
Irene Gallo
24. Irene
@Jonathan: And I think that this discussion has run its course; you’ve made your point, several times. This thread should be available for those who want to discuss the content of the book.
25. Zizawah
I've enjoyed most of Card's stories, some more so than the others and am certainly looking forward to the Gate Thief. He's definitely a very good storyteller and nothwithstanding his personal views, I never really found any offensive messages in his novels. But I agree with @AustralianReader that it'd be nice if this were not a recap but a new chapter. Hope you can post more!
26. garetjax
I'm glad to have a review sort of excerpt. It's been essentially 2 years since I read The Lost Gate, and I've forgotten a lot of it. I think I'll have to reread it to get ready for The Gate Thief. I'd gladly take an excerpt with new material though.
27. DG1
I agree that Card is a homophobe - there is no doubt. That being said, how many of those here have read or viewed Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory? The author was a notorious anti-semite.

Of course, you'll object that its not the same thing. Except that its exactly the same thing. You just happen to like one set of works more than the other (treasured children's classic, etc) and are willing to ignore some bigotry, but not others.
28. Luvbooks
Chill out! It's just a book. I must admit that I am not a fan of his, but I am a fan of his work. His point of views are erroneous, deplorable and just down right stupid. His work however should stand alone. Ender's Game was one of the best books I have read (the other books in the Enders Universe were good also. I like this series and think it is well written. Can't wait to read this one.
P.S. He is a biggot and The book Enders Game seemed to have slight undertones of homosexuality. Maybe it's just me.
29. Vonnegut
I'm a supporter of gay rights, but as far as OSC goes, his writing is just too good. He could be murdering puppies in his backyard every night and I'd still want to read The Gate Thief.

I'm with the others who wish there was some more content in this excerpt.
30. herostar
On topic: This excerpt was a great way to reintroduce readers to the series. I found it a quick refresher without being swamped with details. I never knew of this series until I was browsing some of OSC stuff on Barnes & Noble. Read a quick summary of the Lost Gate and I was hooked from there. Which is cool, cuz now I've got the 2nd book coming out next week!!! How awesome is serendipity eh?

Off topic: I never knew OSC was such a bigot. BUT...I only condemn authors if they put too much of their politics and beliefs into their creations. I honestly never want to read someones political or philosophy agenda hidden in a book. Case in point : Sword of Truth series. Read the last few books and you'll see what I mean. And so far, of all his books I've read. I've yet to read any HATE MONGERING. And that's good enough for me.

Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs(as crazy or insane as they are). It's when we force it upon others that I'll join the Rebellion and crush you flat.

Subscribe to this thread

Receive notification by email when a new comment is added. You must be a registered user to subscribe to threads.
Post a comment