lordofallfools ([info]lordofallfools) wrote,

The Writer and Politics

Originally posted at Thus Sayeth the Lord...

Jay Lake and John Scalzi have both written briefly about why writers should write about politics, and there seems to be a bit of the political furor in the air as we get closer to the US election.

I don’t comment heavily on politics on this blog for a number of reasons.  I understand Lake and Scalzi’s reasoning– Scalzi goes into detail, and what he says certainly isn’t illogical.

BUT…

1) There’s only so much time in the day, and I’ve noticed that when I’mBurning Political, I have less processing power to Burn Fictional.

2) Lake has accused me of being contrary (’accused’ may be the wrong word;  commented might be better).  My wife and children have noted the same character trait, so maybe there’s something to that– I have noted that it’s difficult for me to let disagreements go.

3) I’ve seen how irrational other people can be in regards to politics– I want none of that vitriol here.

This reader refuses to buy any of Jay Lake’s books NOT because of Jay Lake’s political positions, but because of the way Lake chooses to portray those who oppose his opinion.  Lake, in the very first link on this post, notes that he does similarly with Orson Scott Card’s books, though it’s not clear whether Lake is picketing Card because of his tone, or because of his positions…I know that I’ve expressed my frustrations with both writers’ alienating political diatribes over the years.  But I can’t imagine NOT buying their books simply because neither seems to be be capable of constructing a respectful, distanced essay about current governmental policy.  I never want to be so angry about someone’s opinion that I deprive myself of a good story– and both writers are capable of producing marvelous, honest fiction.

That’s all I need from a writer.

A word about tone.  Actually, a phrase– the phrase is “Millenialist Christian Fundamentalist Yahoos.”  As I was browsing livejournal  I realized– this is 1999 all over again.  Only, instead of the angst and anger and bad breath coming from a few nutso survivalists in Michigan and Montana, it was coming from tentatively intelligent, normal people who could possibly live right up the street from me.

Fearmongering doesn’t look good on anyone.  And both sides are doing it.  Here’s a challenge for you– before you write something, examine your opinion and check it for a basis in reality.  If you can’t find at least one widely verifiable fact that points to your conclusion, don’t spread the opinion until you’ve thought about it some more and found more facts.

Demand the same of your political voices.

Tags: politiques, what i meant to say..., writing in life

  • Post a new comment

    Error

  • 5 comments

[info]jaylake

October 22 2008, 12:32:19 UTC 3 years ago

FWIW, I call you contrary from respectful affection, not irritation. Nice post.

[info]lordofallfools

October 22 2008, 12:45:01 UTC 3 years ago

:-D

Whenever anyone uses the word "affection," my OCD forces me to utter a line from The Pirates of Penzance:

"Individually, I look upon you all with affection unspeakable; collectively, I look upon you with a disgust that amounts to absolute detestation. Pity me, beloved friends, for such is my sense of duty that once out of my indentures, I shall feel myself bound, heart and soul...to your extermination."

Huh. Considering the topic...that's kind of apropos.

[info]safewrite

October 22 2008, 16:12:29 UTC 3 years ago

A big part of fearmongering is name calling. Imagine you are a dyed-in-the wool Democrat and someone starts arguing why "All Democrats are idiots." Or imagine you are a dyed-in-the wool Republican and someone starts ranting about how evil Republicans are. One side is calling the other names and they make the opposition into cardboard villains.

We are writers. We detest cardboard villains on the page. They should not exist in real life, either. I'm much more conservative than Jay, but I consider him a friend, even though I sometimes complain about his phrasing.

[info]lordofallfools

October 22 2008, 16:45:31 UTC 3 years ago

I think, even worse than name-calling, is the tendency to assume motive. I believe in debating only what has been said or done according to public record.

[info]safewrite

October 22 2008, 18:15:08 UTC 3 years ago

quite so.
Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Facebook Twitter More login options
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…