Response to Responses to Ender's Game

In reading up on Ender's Game, I came across two essays that reacted very strongly (and negatively) to Ender's Game.
Here are my reactions to their reactions.



First, the essays:
Ender and Hitler: Sympathy for the Superman
Creating the Innocent Killer: Ender's Game, Intention, and Morality

My reactions:

Ender and Hitler.
My initial reaction? Radford doesn't know what the fuck she's talking about.
Some of the comparisons she makes are interesting, I'll give her that. Like the 37 year-old thing. By the same token, coincidences are weird, but they happen. And there are lots more parallels between two things if you're actively looking for them.
One thing that really stood out to me as being radically misconstrued was her insinuation that Novinha was "asking for it" from Marcao, and that Marcao was somehow justified in beating his wife. This is wrong on several levels. Firstly, the purpose of Speaking isn't to say "this person was great." In fact, that's the express opposite of what Speaking is for! Speaking is to say "this is how this person was," whether that paints a pretty picture or not. Ender's Speaking for Marcao wasn't to say "he beat his wife, but it was okay because she was asking for it because she's a woman," his Speaking was to say "he beat his wife; here's why." He didn't say "Marcao only beat his wife, so he wasn't an abusive person," he said "this is why Marcao beat his wife, despite not being abusive otherwise." That Radford consistently jumped to the first conclusion makes Card's comment about her being "radically feminist" not entirely out-of-left-field.
Also, she neglects the biggest and most important part of the difference between the two. Hitler: "I did what I had to do." Ender: "I did what I had to do, but I'll never forgive myself for it." Not going to even bother arguing that Ender is innocent because he didn't know what he was doing, because that's bullshit. He says himself that he probably would've done the same thing if he knew that the battles were for real. Also, Ender isn't innocent. Which segues nicely to

Creating the Innocent Killer:
This is actually a very good essay. I can actually understand how Kessel can read the books through this lens. That said, I don't necessarily agree with his thesis, that Card is trying to paint Ender as a morally spotless person who can do no wrong ever.
He killed (most of) an entire species. That's something a "whoops, my bad" or "sorry" won't fix. The point then, is not that Ender is innocent, but that he spends the rest of his life atoning for what he's done. Everyone in the books tries to reassure him with all sorts of logical reasons for why the things he did aren't his fault, and he understands on an intellectual level that they're right, but deep in his heart he knows what he's done, and doesn't ever forgive himself. The point could then be construed that no matter how justifiable - as in every time where Ender uses it - violence is never right.
That said, this might just be me projecting my own perspective onto a book I like. Card very well might have been trying to say exactly what Kessel read. Then again, this isn't "what did Card mean," because to a degree, that's largely irrelevant. This is just "how I felt as contrasted to others."

And I don't say this often enough: I freaking love Ender's Game.