Few things in literature are as ambitious as recounting the same events told in a previous book from the point of view of another character. The narratorial and character voices can easily slip into the ones used in the preceding work, the author may find he does not actually have that much more to say on the same subject, or the new book could simply read like a money grab.
I have to admit that I was skeptical about Ender’s Shadow. I have a lot of time for Orson Scott Card, and the original, Ender’s Game, was a fantastic piece of work; and yet to retell the same story from the point of view of one of Ender’s lieutenants sounded like a recipe for disaster, especially since I had already read the “sequels” regarding Ender’s travels.
I was more than pleasantly surprised to find that Bean is a completely separate and engaging character in his own right. Far more than a simply sullen boy with “short man” syndrome, he is Ender’s intellectual superior, but lacks Ender’s empathy and charisma. Hyper-observant and capable (the reasons for which are uncovered in the book), he comes to the attention of the recruiters for Battle School by manipulating the street gangs of Rotterdam. He doesn’t rise through the ranks simply because he recognises the manipulations of the teachers at Battle School for what they are: just a game, and is given alternate privileges as a result.
Most of the time, his story does not directly intersect with Enders. Indeed, Card goes out of his way to ensure that the two do not meet or interact unless it’s absolutely necessary. This helps to enforce the importance of Bean’s interactions with Ender. It was genuinely fascinating to see the same words uttered, but to see them interpreted differently.
If you haven’t read Ender’s Game yet, start there: it’s the better book, being shorter and containing more punch. Ender’s Shadow is great, but I feel that it spends more time filling in details left out in the author’s first treatment of the story.
Wired is running an article on the