# Political Neutrality



## Eric S. Kim (Oct 22, 2014)

There are a heck of a lot of politics in literature, such as "War and Peace" and "Les Miserables." These novels are excellent in their own right. But I'm the kind of guy who would try to avoid expressing political statements as much as possible when I write. For example, I don't want to make assumptions or give statistics regarding gun control or income taxes or free trade when the genre is Sci-Fi Adventure. I just focus on the cosmic journey that my characters delve into, battling against spaceships and deactivating that freakin' "galaxy bomb."

Personally, I think politics is a waste of time when it comes to writing. The adventure is what matters, and it's makes me feel discontent if specific parties (like Democrats, Republicans, Green Party, or whatever) are involved. Worse, readers would be incredibly polarized by such political overtones/undertones. Unless I really don't give a crap (and it happens a few times in my life), I wouldn't want my readers to feel so divided over things like this. Turning fiction into a statement is going to separate a lot of people. I'd rather not have that. I'd prefer universal themes that has nothing to do with taxes, immigration, national security, etc. I want the reader to concentrate on what matters most: the adventure and the characters that are a part of it.

But then again, I do have the urge to express my libertarian leanings. It's possible that I could produce some satirical contemporary comedies in the future when I'm in the mood.

What are your thoughts on politics in literature? Do you sometimes feel like expressing your own political opinions in your own novels?


----------



## JV (Nov 12, 2013)

I've found it nearly impossible to leave political statements out of my novels. I'm about as far left as you can possibly go...forget democrat and think socialist; some of those values leak into my characters. I do express opposing views and I'm educated enough (literally) to give those views a fair shake. Has it alienated some readers? Sure. One reviewer called one of my novels, "A zombie story draped in a socialist blanket" and went on to accuse me of gender bending, twisting religion, and stirring up racial tension using low hanging fruit...I deny none of it.

But, I still do this full time, so someone likes what they're reading.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Once actual scientific facts became politically controversial, it be came really hard to write a future setting that extrapolates from current projections without getting called political.

So I went with it and fully explored the politics of the worlds I built, but the one that happened on this planet in the future, and the wholly fictional one. Themes of racism, the powerful preying on the weak, certain motivators causing bad behavior and techno-social stagnation, folks duped into acting against their interests by the powerful and influential, people with good goals but awful tactics, and what people do about it became a very interesting garnish to the tale and made the world seem real.


----------



## Revolution (Sep 17, 2012)

It depends on the novel.

It's always best to appear unbiased in fiction because people HATE being preached to. However, in a couple of my novels, I HAD to preach but in a way that doesn't shame or cast judgement, but rather put the characters (thereby readers) into the shoes of someone else. 

I hate the terms left and right wing, though, because I, like so many other people, have TWO wings. There are policies that don't lean either way, or a policies that are needed but are staunchly refuted simply because of which team you're supposed to be rooting for (healthcare comes to mind). But if you do preach or show a clear political leaning, you have to expect negative reviews. I see it all the time in the genres I read (apocalypse). 

But I think of the show The Walking Dead. It's full of guns and southern accents, but the show itself isn't poisoned by the right or left political BS. That's what makes it a great show, and if you want a great novel, one that everyone can appreciate, present it in a way that doesn't lean either way. The world is divided enough that I don't think we need any more to set us apart


----------



## 75845 (Jan 1, 1970)

The_Outlaw_Torn said:


> There are a heck of a lot of politics in literature, such as "War and Peace" and "Les Miserables." These novels are excellent in their own right. And I'm the kind of guy who would try to avoid expressing political statements as much as possible when I write. For example, I don't want to make assumptions or give statistics regarding gun control or income taxes or free trade when the genre is Sci-Fi Adventure. I just focus on the cosmic journey that my characters delve into, battling against spaceships and deactivating that freakin' "galaxy bomb."


Where you end depends on where you start. Try this version of your paragraph:

"There is not a lot of politics in literature, such as "Pride and Prejudice" and "Clockwork Orange." These novels are excellent in their own right and I'm the kind of guy who would try to avoid expressing political statements as much as possible when I write. For example, I don't want to make assumptions or give statistics regarding gun control or income taxes or free trade when the genre is Sci-Fi Adventure, I leave that to Ursula Le Guin. I just focus on the cosmic journey that my characters delve into, battling against spaceships and deactivating that freakin' "galaxy bomb." Political statements while battling with spaceships and bombs, that I leave to Ann Leckie."


----------



## Guest (Dec 2, 2014)

I have read a range of books that aspire to be political thrillers. Some achieve that not because of the politics, but because the writer has used the politics judiciously and only as far as it directs the plot. Many tend to use the story as a means of showing how political savvy they are and in doing so lose the reader who either gets bored, or disagrees with the authors arguments. It is difficult to keep reading when the writer is trying to convince you that he/she is right when they should be expending their efforts in getting you to just accept the MC's idealism because its subordinate, but necessary to the plot.

When I use politics in my books it is done so it allows the reader to immediately dismiss it having got the idea, then get on with reading the story. I admit to not being politically oriented or masterful with the subtleties of political ideologies, but then neither (in the main) are my readers.


----------



## JV (Nov 12, 2013)

Revolution said:


> It depends on the novel.
> 
> It's always best to appear unbiased in fiction because people HATE being preached to. However, in a couple of my novels, I HAD to preach but in a way that doesn't shame or cast judgement, but rather put the characters (thereby readers) into the shoes of someone else.
> 
> ...


I don't think that's why WTD is successful. The West Wing was an extremely successful show and it had very clear political stances. Newsroom is successful and it takes clear stances. True Detective is a revelation and it holds strong views on religion. People enjoy seeing these subjects tackled.

Many of my readers know my far left views. They know I feel religion is a force of destruction. They see both of these items in my books, but they still love me and wait eagerly for my next installment. I've got readers from all walks of life. Stephen Hunter is a cheerleader for the Conservative party and I know liberals that eat his stuff up.

It's all about presentation. Are you able to engage the reader? There are ways of tackling these issues without standing on a soap box.


----------



## AbbyBabble (Mar 16, 2013)

Hutchinson said:


> meanwhile, you want space libertarians, you go to indietown and stock up.


 Heh heh. Right on.



The_Outlaw_Torn said:


> I wouldn't want my readers to feel so divided over things like this. (...) I'd prefer universal themes that has nothing to do with taxes, immigration, national security, etc. I want the reader to concentrate on what matters most: the adventure and the characters that are a part of it.


 I'm tempted not to touch nerves when writing fiction. But I believe that if you have a strong moral stance or worldview on a controversial topic, it will seep into your fiction. It may be disguised as fun pulp storytelling, but readers who have the opposite worldview will be repelled.

I write otherworld SFF, so my fiction doesn't focus on U.S. taxes, immigration, gun control laws, or anything in our society. It's action-adventure with high stakes battles and larger-than-life heroes. However, the things I feel strongly about are intrinsic to the premise. For example: I'm a big believer in individual rights to freedom, and free will. If a reader personally feels very strongly that humans are inherently dumb/evil and should be controlled by a wiser entity, then they will probably detest my books. They might not understand why. They might chalk up their disgusted reaction to something superficial. But deep down, on a fundamental level, their worldview is clashing with my worldview.


----------



## Revolution (Sep 17, 2012)

JV said:


> I don't think that's why WTD is successful. The West Wing was an extremely successful show and it had very clear political stances. Newsroom is successful and it takes clear stances. True Detective is a revelation and it holds strong views on religion. People enjoy seeing these subjects tackled.
> 
> Many of my readers know my far left views. They know I feel religion is a force of destruction. They see both of these items in my books, but they still love me and wait eagerly for my next installment. I've got readers from all walks of life. Stephen Hunter is a cheerleader for the Conservative party and I know liberals that eat his stuff up.
> 
> It's all about presentation. Are you able to engage the reader? There are ways of tackling these issues without standing on a soap box.


The last book I read was "One Second After" and although a good book, it left me slightly bitter due to the conservative agenda. Does that mean I won't read anything by William R Forstchen? No. But the leftist bashing was distracting and unnecessary. The west wing was done THROUGH characters and stories, which was the point I made in regards to my stories.

I don't taunt or shame conservatives in my novels, or try to make out that they're inferior. I simply add situations that highlight struggles and opinions through the lives of someone else. My point is that if you have a political leaning in books, you will alienate some readers whether you like it or not. That's fine if you don't need them or you're only catering to your crowd, but if you want to make a hit with everyone, it's best to be unbiased.


----------



## coolpixel (Sep 17, 2012)

i am deeply interested in politics but my books are all politically neutral.

books make money for me.

my political views do not.

i have no interest in reducing my money generating market.


----------



## komura 420 (Aug 25, 2013)

My books come with a strong political stance, libertarian socialist.

The flat panel fiction machine constantly makes heroes from those who in real like are the villains. The cops, the soldiers, and other government murderers.

My books are dedicated: 'To all women and men that come up from their knees with their fists closed.  Respect.'

If some people don't like it, not my problem. 
I don't post here much because of my politics.


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

Political views are not the focus of my books, but some politics creeps in. I try to portray my characters as real people and real people do have political views that influence their behavior and reactions to others' behavior. It's important to be careful you're simply developing the characters and not writing in such a way the reader feels you are trying to convert them. As to polarizing, there's another school of thought. Would you rather excite one set of avid fans who can't wait until your next book (even though you turn off another set), or have them all go 'meh' when they read?


----------



## Jonathan C. Gillespie (Aug 9, 2012)

My general advice: write politics, religion, etc all you want, but either have the skills to go full-tilt in your face, a la Orwell, or be oblique about it, so that the reader is left thinking and can extrapolate their own conclusions in a way they might not have otherwise.


----------



## zoe tate (Dec 18, 2013)

The_Outlaw_Torn said:


> Personally, I think politics is a waste of time when it comes to writing.


I imagine the owner of this business, one of London most successful bookshops and his many equivalents all over the world, might have something to say about that perspective.


----------



## EthanRussellErway (Nov 17, 2011)

Write about whatever you want to write about, and then brace yourself for whatever trolls come lurking.  There will always be trolls.  Just go to some of your favorite authors on Amazon and take a look at some of the troll reviews.  I'm not saying all poor reviews are written by trolls, but you can generally spot them pretty easily.  These are the type of people who refer to George R.R. Martin as "His Royal Lardness" because he doesn't get them their books on time.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

Revolution said:


> The last book I read was "One Second After" and although a good book, it left me slightly bitter due to the conservative agenda. Does that mean I won't read anything by William R Forstchen? No. But the leftist bashing was distracting and unnecessary. The west wing was done THROUGH characters and stories, which was the point I made in regards to my stories.
> 
> I don't taunt or shame conservatives in my novels, or try to make out that they're inferior. I simply add situations that highlight struggles and opinions through the lives of someone else. My point is that if you have a political leaning in books, you will alienate some readers whether you like it or not. That's fine if you don't need them or you're only catering to your crowd, but if you want to make a hit with everyone, it's best to be unbiased.


I agree that Forstchen inserted unnecessary insults into that book demeaning the Left and making us out to be all flower picking hippies incapable of doing anything to support ourselves. I've read books from the opposite perspective that portray all conservatives as knuckle-dragging barbarians incapable of putting together full sentences. It is very distracting no matter who does it.

I have no problem with an author showing their political point of view in their novels, but it's all a matter of degree. Octavia Butler did a brilliant job, I thought, in _The Parable of the Sower_ getting her socio-political points across without bashing anyone or being overbearing. As an Indie example (even a KB member example), I think Steven Konkoly does a pretty decent job showing his politic views in this thrillers without overdoing it. Quantifying the degree that's 'enough' is purely a matter of opinion, but I would think that at the point that you find yourself describing the other side of the political fence in stereotypical fashion, you've crossed over. Flower picking hippies and knuckle-dragging barbarians are still humans and just as complex as the rest of us....


----------



## Joe_Nobody (Oct 23, 2012)

I am a political agnostic, my beliefs and positions irrelevant to anyone but me. (but I bet they would surprise most folks on this board)
In my mind, categorizing people via a silo of right or left does a tremendous disservice to the complexity of  human intellect. I've rarely encountered any situation, issue, conflict, or person that was so clear cut.

That said, I've found it interesting to read the reviews on one of my titles where I actually made a serious attempt to walk the center line, or give both right and left perspectives of the issue at hand. For that one book, I received reviews that stated:

-The author is a libertarian's wet-dream
-Don't read this book, the author is liberal mouthpiece who hates conservatives
-This book came across as if it was written in the Fox newsroom...

All for the same book? Go figure.

My take from all of this: No matter what you write, some people are going to put their own spin on your prose. Which brings us in a complete circle back to the second sentence of this post.

My bottom line - I write what I feel makes the absolute best story without regard to political interpretations. Like so many of have said, and I firmly believe, a good story trumps everything.


----------



## Carradee (Aug 21, 2010)

EthanRussellErway said:


> Write about whatever you want to write about, and then brace yourself for whatever trolls come lurking. There will always be trolls.





Joe_Nobody said:


> No matter what you write, some people are going to put their own spin on your prose.


These.

I write what I write, and folks respond as they will. Some love it, some hate it, and some have told me that they didn't care for a story at first&#8230;and changed their minds as they thought about the story some more.


----------



## starkllr (Mar 21, 2013)

Geoffrey said:


> I have no problem with an author showing their political point of view in their novels, but it's all a matter of degree. Octavia Butler did a brilliant job, I thought, in _The Parable of the Sower_ getting her socio-political points across without bashing anyone or being overbearing. As an Indie example (even a KB member example), I think Steven Konkoly does a pretty decent job showing his politic views in this thrillers without overdoing it. Quantifying the degree that's 'enough' is purely a matter of opinion, but I would think that at the point that you find yourself describing the other side of the political fence in stereotypical fashion, you've crossed over. Flower picking hippies and knuckle-dragging barbarians are still humans and just as complex as the rest of us....


I agree with this. I also have a problem with authors pausing the action to insert a political diatribe that is really more suited to the OpEd page of the newspaper than the story they're stuffing it into. I'm rereading "Winter's Tale", and the author's politics are fairly clear throughout the book, but there's one point about 1/4 of the way through where a throwaway character gets a two-page speech about poverty, its causes and what should be done about it. Even though I personally more or less agree with the views expressed, I still hate that scene, because it's such a blatant shoving of one of the author's pet positions down my throat, in as ham-handed a way as I can imagine. It's especially glaring because the author shows throughout the rest of the book that he can make his points far more subtly, without jumping up on a table and shouting THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE AND YOU OUGHT TO BELIEVE IT TOO!!!!!


----------



## sela (Nov 2, 2014)

I think there is a vast difference between creating an authentic future world with conflict that includes politics (how could a future world not have politics?) and lecturing your reader, hitting them over the head with your own political views.

There have been a number of SF books I've read that included politics without lecturing. If there was a political leaning of the author (and there always is, but sometimes the author doesn't think it's there in the story or isn't aware of it) that wasn't the focus of the story or the main conflict. It was a reality that affected the story world but wasn't the main conflict. ETA: An example I love is Vernor Vinge's _A Deepness in the Sky_. I've also read SF books where the whole point of the book was to hammer on a political agenda and every character and every situation was a mere tool to get their political point across. That kind of book plays well to those who support that particular political point of view, but will be lost on everyone else. Some authors do this deliberately to appeal to a particular group of readers who share their views and more power to them. They know their audience. An example of a badly-done political rant masquerading as SF is _A State of Disobedience_ by Kratman.

To me the best and most timeless works will not lecture or preach, but will be nuanced and subtle, forcing the reader to think and imagine and wonder. The politics should be seamless and almost invisible unless the actual theme is politics and its conflicts.


----------



## Cactus Lady (Jun 4, 2014)

My worldview (including a deep mistrust of government, authority, the cultural elite, and people who seek out positions of power) comes through in a lot of the themes of my books. But I sincerely hope I don't preach about it; I just want to tell a good story that anyone can enjoy. And I hate it when other authors bash me over the head with their opinions - whether or not I agree with them - when I'm just trying to enjoy a good story. The worst is when a writer uses stereotypes, cardboard characters, and pontificating to insult people who don't agree with their politics and opinions.


----------



## Lefevre (Feb 1, 2014)

JV said:


> I've found it nearly impossible to leave political statements out of my novels. I'm about as far left as you can possibly go...forget democrat and think socialist; some of those values leak into my characters. I do express opposing views and I'm educated enough (literally) to give those views a fair shake. Has it alienated some readers? Sure. One reviewer called one of my novels, "A zombie story draped in a socialist blanket" and went on to accuse me of gender bending, twisting religion, and stirring up racial tension using low hanging fruit...I deny none of it.
> 
> But, I still do this full time, so someone likes what they're reading.


I like books that take risks, and think that is what self publishing is all about. JV..Put your books in your signature so I can check them out.


----------



## Guest (Dec 2, 2014)

Most of my antagonists are leftist-socialist writers who are too busy drinking the Kool Aid to acknowledge the mess their ideology produces. I kill most of them off, and only rarely have them experience a blinding light on the road to Damascus.


----------



## deedawning (Aug 31, 2013)

The_Outlaw_Torn said:


> There are a heck of a lot of politics in literature, such as "War and Peace" and "Les Miserables." These novels are excellent in their own right. But I'm the kind of guy who would try to avoid expressing political statements as much as possible when I write. For example, I don't want to make assumptions or give statistics regarding gun control or income taxes or free trade when the genre is Sci-Fi Adventure. I just focus on the cosmic journey that my characters delve into, battling against spaceships and deactivating that freakin' "galaxy bomb."
> 
> Personally, I think politics is a waste of time when it comes to writing. The adventure is what matters, and it's makes me feel discontent if specific parties (like Democrats, Republicans, Green Party, or whatever) are involved. Worse, readers would be incredibly polarized by such political overtones/undertones. Unless I really don't give a crap (and it happens a few times in my life), I wouldn't want my readers to feel so divided over things like this. Turning fiction into a statement is going to separate a lot of people. I'd rather not have that. I'd prefer universal themes that has nothing to do with taxes, immigration, national security, etc. I want the reader to concentrate on what matters most: the adventure and the characters that are a part of it.
> 
> ...


If you don't think politics belong in fiction, why would you bring it up? But since you did, I'll delve into the subject. Most of my stories are politically neutral, but when I do get political I go all the way. The end book in my sig is called Gender Wars-War on Women. It's a novel about a woman who runs for president in a third party and despite the odds, prevails in a cliffhanger. But that's not all. I wrote & pubbed a non-fiction booklet called How FOX NEWS KO'd the Republican Party. After that one I'll let you guess where my political leanings are. I also have a series called The Televangelist which is definitely getting political, via the Mob. Truth is I like writing about politics and from what I can see, based on the bevy of political TV shows people seem to find politics interesting.


----------



## vlmain (Aug 10, 2011)

For most novels, a neutral position is probably the best position, but I must admit, I do love to read books that are politically charged, even if their position opposes mine. _Especially_ when their views oppose mine. I enjoy glimpses of what's inside the minds of those who view things differently than me. It's fascinating.

Controversy sells quite well, too, and can spread like wildfire. And you probably won't have to beg for reviews. That said, this is not recommended for those who take one star reviews to heart.


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

Sela said:


> I think there is a vast difference between creating an authentic future world with conflict that includes politics (how could a future world not have politics?) and lecturing your reader, hitting them over the head with your own political views.


Yeah. My characters have political views, which are often different to mine. I might give some of them specific political views just to point out how silly they are, but I'm not going to spend time lecturing readers about it.

But trying to maintain neutrality in an SF story just seems silly. If we're writing about worlds radically different to our own, how can we not include politics... even if only to the extent of having a world without any?


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

One can mean different things by "including politics" in a novel. If you have an evil, scheming congresswoman character named "Nanci Belosi," that's one thing. Or if the bad guys are a bunch of Republicans plotting to assassinate the head of the EPA. Or when there's a particular character who feels like the mouthpiece of the author -- that figure's main role seems to be to tell the reader what they're supposed to think. I think this is the sort of thing people generally think of when you mention including politics in a novel -- when you're trying to make a very direct, clear point about electoral politics. These sorts of political content can feel hectoring or overly obvious. I don't care for it, myself.

But this isn't the only mode of political discourse in fiction. Actually, I think political issues are always being explored in your writing, whether you want them to be or not. If you make one of your fighter-jet pilots in that Afghanistan war novel female, you're making a political point -- woman can fly jets in combat. Unless she's the one totally incompetent pilot, compared to her ten male colleagues. Then you're suggesting that perhaps woman shouldn't fly jets. If you're writing in a setting in which your cast of characters could be diverse, but all your characters "happen to be" white, you're making a political statement. Probably several of them, actually. If your characters have pre-marital sex and it's okay and everyone lives happily ever after, you're making a political statement. If your book touches on the total horror of being poor, you're engaging with a political issue, even if you're not offering some pat solution to the problem. Heck, if one of your characters takes her kids in to get their two-year vaccinations, and it's no biggie, that's political too. The very words you choose to use can send a political message. 

In short, your political values very likely permeate your writing, even if you think you're "staying away from politics."


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

Becca Mills said:


> ...I think political issues are always being explored in your writing, whether you want them to be or not.
> 
> If you make one of your fighter-jet pilots in that Afghanistan war novel female, you're making a political point -- woman can fly jets in combat. Unless she's the one totally incompetent pilot, compared to her ten male colleagues. Then you're suggesting that perhaps woman shouldn't fly jets.
> 
> ...


This sums up what I was going to say.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Edward M. Grant said:


> I'm no expert on the history of religion in America, but didn't the church used to cozy up to the Democrats in the 60s? The not-very-comfortable alliance between christian fundamentalists and libertarians on the right seems mostly based on 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend,' not any kind of similar belief.


The Civil Rights Act basically reversed the polarity on America's oligar-- I mean political parties because a LOT of people felt that ending segregation was betraying them... somehow. These were the same kind of people who originally abandoned the Republican party because of the Emancipation, which destroyed their 'human suffering'-based economy (because hurling your poorly industrialized forced against literally all the factories and steel in the country wasn't what did it. Nope.).


----------



## MarkdownFanatic (Jan 14, 2014)

Immigration, gun control, taxes, sexism, racism ... all touching, and touched by, politics.
.
One's political convictions are based on one's personal convictions (unless, of course, one happens to be a politician, in which case one's political convictions are based on the latest poll).
.
If your reader's views and therefore politics are opposed to yours, you are unpleasantly political.
.
If your reader's views and therefore politics are the same as yours, you are pleasantly non-political.
.
If you allow each side to have their say, you are half-political - or just plain confused.
.
And if you can't see the politics in "Pride and Prejudice" (sexism) and "Clockwork Orange" (totalitarianism), you oughta re-read'em ;o)


----------



## deedawning (Aug 31, 2013)

Edward M. Grant said:


> Personally, I don't even mention skin colour unless it happens to be important to the character... at least, I don't think I do, I'd have to double-check my descriptions . The people of the future don't really care, now they have Furries to hate.


Well if you're describing someone and don't mention skin color, you're not really giving the reader an accurate picture. Readers picture characters by what we tell them. We can glossover minor differences but major ones should be addressed


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

deedawning said:


> Well if you're describing someone and don't mention skin color, you're not really giving the reader an accurate picture.


I disagree. If you're including irrelevant details, I'd say you're overdescribing.

I couldn't tell you what many of my favourite fictional characters are 'supposed' to look like, unless someone's made a movie of the novel.


----------



## 75814 (Mar 12, 2014)

I'm very outspoken and opinionated with my left-wing politics, but when writing fiction, I take the neutral path. I have attempted to write political stuff in the past, but I always felt like I was being too blunt with it, so I never finished it.

But people can find blunt politics in just about anything. Some of my books feature a female protagonist and another one features a black protagonist, so I've been accused of being "too PC" just by virtue of the fact that I don't solely write stories about white men.


----------



## sngraves (Aug 10, 2014)

I think if you were to read my books you wouldn't have a clue about my personal political feelings. I have characters who are very far left and characters who are very far right, and it doesn't matter if they are good guys or bad guys. As the author I don’t preach a position in my fiction, but my characters get into plenty of arguments over their own convictions.


----------



## deedawning (Aug 31, 2013)

Edward M. Grant said:


> I disagree. If you're including irrelevant details, I'd say you're overdescribing.
> 
> I couldn't tell you what many of my favourite fictional characters are 'supposed' to look like, unless someone's made a movie of the novel.


Maybe with SF, descriptions aren't that important, but in romance they're very important


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

You really can't avoid some degree of politics writing romance. The personal is political, as they say. No matter what, you are going to take a stance birth control, male/female relationships, and female sexuality.

I avoid certain controversial issues like abortion. I've never read a romance that handled abortion or accidental pregnancy in a way that satisfied me.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Perry Constantine said:


> I'm very outspoken and opinionated with my left-wing politics, but when writing fiction, I take the neutral path. I have attempted to write political stuff in the past, but I always felt like I was being too blunt with it, so I never finished it.
> 
> But people can find blunt politics in just about anything. Some of my books feature a female protagonist and another one features a black protagonist, so I've been accused of being "too PC" just by virtue of the fact that I don't solely write stories about white men.


Oh my god, don't get me started on the dudes who are RULL MAD about a female action lead in Fantasy.

If I here 'women weren't allowed to fight back then' one more time...


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

Vaalingrade said:
 

> The Civil Rights Act basically reversed the polarity on America's oligar-- I mean political parties because a LOT of people felt that ending segregation was betraying them... somehow. These were the same kind of people who originally abandoned the Republican party because of the Emancipation, which destroyed their 'human suffering'-based economy (because hurling your poorly industrialized forced against literally all the factories and steel in the country wasn't what did it. Nope.).


There was a substantial black pro-segregation contingent, but reality is nuanced and people waving ideological flags often are not.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

deedawning said:


> Well if you're describing someone and don't mention skin color, you're not really giving the reader an accurate picture. Readers picture characters by what we tell them. We can glossover minor differences but major ones should be addressed


I dunno about this. Something I have noticed about my own writing is that I will go into fair detail about people's personalities and strange little quirks, but I have to work hard to remember to put in their skin colors. Skin color is not trivial, but you edge very close to bio-determinism when you present those kinds of arguments.


----------



## deedawning (Aug 31, 2013)

Hutchinson said:


> I dunno about this. Something I have noticed about my own writing is that I will go into fair detail about people's personalities and strange little quirks, but I have to work hard to remember to put in their skin colors. Skin color is not trivial, but you edge very close to bio-determinism when you present those kinds of arguments.


C'mon man. When you describe someone, you are doing it for the readers benefit so they can picture the person you're writing about. I write romance, sometimes interracial. Can you imagine describing a hero or heroine in detail and unless it's evident from other factors, ie blond, redhead, blue eyes etc. leaving out skin color or at least race. That isn't p.c. it's a cop out. By the way with hair & eye color sometimes it still isn't enough, because there are blonds, red heads & blue eyes in both AA and Latino communities.


----------



## shadowfox (Jun 22, 2012)

For me, inside my writing anything is up for grabs. If I'm driven to write a book about politics I'll write it. I seem to end up discussing religion a lot. Just how it goes.


----------



## Colorwheel (Nov 21, 2014)

As a reader (mostly), my "soapbox vs. underpinnings" test is: Is it going to sound petty and incomprehensible to a reader from another country? Is it going to sound eye-rollingly dated if someone reads it 10 years from now, or even 5 years from now? For me, that's the difference between something limited and parochial, and something informed by your beliefs in a wider, more timeless sense.

Also as a reader, I strongly dislike straw-man opposition. Engage characters with opposing viewpoints honestly and with compassion, and if you can't because the subject is too near and dear to your heart, leave those characters/viewpoints out. Straw men really grind my reading gears.

All of this also depends greatly on your genre. If you're writing political thrillers or something else directly rooted in the real, present world, that's a different beast from F/SF. IMO, the further your world lies from here-and-now, the more baked-into-the-world and timeless the approach should be. If I come across a screed against the American Political Fight of the Month transparently mouthpieced by orcs or aliens, I'm throwing the book across the room.

This is not to say that I want my genres to be pure mindless escapism; I've read way too much Le Guin to go that route. But give it a LOT of thought and build your world on its own terms, unless your baseline intent is to write a thinly veiled political parody with a short shelf life. That's also OK, but know what you're going for.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

The problem with not mentioning characters' race/skin color is that the vast majority of white readers will assume, without even thinking about it, that those characters are white. It's an aspect of white privilege that whiteness is the default. For a glaring example, see the reaction to the first _Hunger Games_ film, where a number of fans where shocked and angry that the filmmakers "decided" to have several characters played by black actors. These characters were, in fact, described as dark-skinned in the book, but the assumption of whiteness overpowered many readers' ability to pick up and remember that info.

So, if it matters at all that a particular character is a person of color, you had better tell your reader. A couple times, in fact. If it doesn't matter (because this is a character who's introduced and then eaten by zombies on the next page, or whatever), then by all means skip over it, but you can be pretty sure that most of your readers will not imagine the diverse slice of humanity you envisioned while you were writing.

And if you're sitting there thinking, "Well *I've* never caught myself assuming a character is white!" ... that's great. I wish more people were like you -- including me.

As for the OP, I'm sort of baffled to be reminded of this I-always-keep-politics-out-of-my-writing thread in light of his I'm-too-progressive-to-write-epic-fantasy thread of a couple days ago. It seems weird to me that you don't see a contradiction there, CasualCAn.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

Well, I'd blame the writing classes for that one, because there was a strain of "write about their EMOTIONS and FEELINGS not THEIR OUTFITS or THEIR BODIES" that leads you to just tune out the physical description aspect.  Because it wasn't literary (things may have changed, it's been over a decade since I attended those creative writing classes) to do both, talk about inner life and also in addition do physical descriptions.  I just don't think it's a white privilege deal, just a "this is what they teach in college/academia about fiction writing" deal.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Leave the politics out, keep the philosophy in, never be neutral, let your characters be real.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Oh look, this thread popped up just in time for this gem:

I got an email from a fan expressing concern for the 'interracial relationships' in one of my books, specifically because they are -- and I'm going to quote here 'Not racist or anything, but I don't think that black and whites should mix'.

That would have been enough for me to bring the dragonfire... buuuuut...

*SPOILERS AHEAD*

One relationship is between a black man and a 7'5 winged woman with hinged ribs who grows fireproof scales when she gets agitated. Apparently he's the oddity here.

The other is between a white man and an elf with san brown skin and blonde hair... who is later revealed to be a cat person*. She's a CAT. A bloody CAT. But that's not the issue with this person, it's because her illusory skin color is brown. A. CAT.

This person completely missed the part where these folks weren't even HUMAN to grouse about their skin color. I may give them a conniption when they get to SBII and we get to hang out with the _blue_ humans.

See, this is why I don't leave the political issues out of the books. One, so people like this get forced to face their issues (the sender said they were going to keep reading, but hoped I would 'pick a proper match' for the two pink skinned folks). And tow, because you have no idea how rare it is for someone like me to see... someone like me in a book and not have it just the the result of an error in the cover art.

And readers really do respond to it. You have no idea how many Iranian people have emailed me to thank me for having an Iranian hero in a book, and how many children of mixed marriages were just so damn happy when I put out a tale with a mixed family that wasn't about some kind of trials and tribulations of being mixed.

*I might be simplifying what her race is, but still cat girl.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Vaalingrade said:


> Oh look, this thread popped up just in time for this gem:
> 
> I got an email from a fan expressing concern for the 'interracial relationships' in one of my books, specifically because they are -- and I'm going to quote here 'Not racist or anything, but I don't think that black and whites should mix'.
> 
> ...


OMG. This is classic.

But that's the trouble with prejudice and bigotry -- everything gets filed into neat packages, whether they belong there or not. Therefore the non-humans have to be filed into human races anyway.

Camille


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Hutchinson said:


> Well, I'd blame the writing classes for that one, because there was a strain of "write about their EMOTIONS and FEELINGS not THEIR OUTFITS or THEIR BODIES" that leads you to just tune out the physical description aspect. Because it wasn't literary (things may have changed, it's been over a decade since I attended those creative writing classes) to do both, talk about inner life and also in addition do physical descriptions. I just don't think it's a white privilege deal, just a "this is what they teach in college/academia about fiction writing" deal.


Well, I can't really speak to what happens in college-level fiction classes, since I took exactly one ... in, like, 1990. I suspect most people here are like me -- not a lot of formal training in creative writing and not writing literary fiction.

I do think that a big paragraph of just describing someone's physical appearance would be awkward and tedious. I can well imagine CW teachers steering students away from that. Or maybe, among beginning students, there's a tendency to focus too much on the superficial, as though once you've described someone's physical appearance, you've "developed" that character, so teachers push them strongly in the other direction? Dunno. At any rate, there's a long continuum between a big dump of description and not conveying any physical info at all about a character.

The specific aspect of white privilege I mentioned enters into the process when readers interpret what they're reading, not in the choices writers make. It's a tendency writers need to be aware of when making choices.


----------



## Colorwheel (Nov 21, 2014)

I love "complaints" that only serve to embarass the speaker by inadvertently exposing them as awful people. I may be evil for thinking that.

Vaalingrade, side note, now I _definitely_ want to read your books. [I was half convinced by the _Slayers_ avatar, honestly.]

Re descriptions: Obv. I have never taken a post-10th-grade writing course, but it does annoy me a bit when an author drops character profile details constantly through the entire book. Ex. at 90% we are still being reminded that the hero has brown hair and the best friend has emerald green eyes. I feel as though I should be taking notes for a quiz at the end. YMMV as always.


----------



## Ros_Jackson (Jan 11, 2014)

Becca Mills said:


> One can mean different things by "including politics" in a novel. If you have an evil, scheming congresswoman character named "Nanci Belosi," that's one thing. Or if the bad guys are a bunch of Republicans plotting to assassinate the head of the EPA. Or when there's a particular character who feels like the mouthpiece of the author -- that figure's main role seems to be to tell the reader what they're supposed to think. I think this is the sort of thing people generally think of when you mention including politics in a novel -- when you're trying to make a very direct, clear point about electoral politics. These sorts of political content can feel hectoring or overly obvious. I don't care for it, myself.
> 
> But this isn't the only mode of political discourse in fiction. Actually, I think political issues are always being explored in your writing, whether you want them to be or not. If you make one of your fighter-jet pilots in that Afghanistan war novel female, you're making a political point -- woman can fly jets in combat. Unless she's the one totally incompetent pilot, compared to her ten male colleagues. Then you're suggesting that perhaps woman shouldn't fly jets. If you're writing in a setting in which your cast of characters could be diverse, but all your characters "happen to be" white, you're making a political statement. Probably several of them, actually. If your characters have pre-marital sex and it's okay and everyone lives happily ever after, you're making a political statement. If your book touches on the total horror of being poor, you're engaging with a political issue, even if you're not offering some pat solution to the problem. Heck, if one of your characters takes her kids in to get their two-year vaccinations, and it's no biggie, that's political too. The very words you choose to use can send a political message.
> 
> In short, your political values very likely permeate your writing, even if you think you're "staying away from politics."


This.

Everything is political on some level, and I'm always suspicious when people start claiming neutrality, or that they're trying to steer clear of politics, because it's far too non-specific. I'd include in that the "no politics" rule on this board. If that were taken to its logical conclusion there would be no threads on KU, digital VAT, the Amazon/Hachette dispute, anything to do with money, and and and.

So, what does "neutrality" really mean? If it means no long rants by characters declaiming a particular political point of view, I can get behind that stylistic choice. If it means not calling your villain Arak Bobama, fair enough. Being political doesn't have to mean being absurdly obvious.


----------



## Gone To Croatan (Jun 24, 2011)

Ros_Jackson said:


> Everything is political on some level


Only because politicians have made it so.

I couldn't even tell you the skin colour of most of my characters, because it's irrelevant to them. Most of the fathers in my worlds would much rather their white, blond daughter was dating a black guy than a tentacle monster. And as for the Furries...

That said, the novel I'm writing over Christmas is about a Soviet-era mission to Tau Ceti by a group of teenagers who think Stalin is still alive because he started the program to exploit alien tech recovered from Tunguska and everyone's too scared to tell them he's dead. So there's some politics involved.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Colorwheel said:


> Vaalingrade, side note, now I _definitely_ want to read your books. [I was half convinced by the _Slayers_ avatar, honestly.]


If you like Slayers, yo won't be disappointed. It's not as funny, but you'll see the influences.



> Re descriptions: Obv. I have never taken a post-10th-grade writing course, but it does annoy me a bit when an author drops character profile details constantly through the entire book. Ex. at 90% we are still being reminded that the hero has brown hair and the best friend has emerald green eyes. I feel as though I should be taking notes for a quiz at the end. YMMV as always.


Agreed. One and done is how I like it as a reader. If, every time someone's eyes do something I have to be reminded what color they are, I start wondering why you're so concerned I might forget.

I did play with that a bit though. There's one characters whose eyes are described 
(by other characters) as yellow when they're being a jack-hole, amber when they're being benign and gold on the RARE occasion they're being a decent human being who does not deserve to be punched in the mouth.


----------



## Cherise (May 13, 2012)

If you are going to describe a character's appearance, then please do so before I form a picture in my mind. 

Nothing annoys me more than when I have known a character for thirty pages and only then do I find out he or she is supposed to look a certain way. Sorry, at that point I ignore the description and just picture the character the way I have been for the past half hour.


----------



## Chad Winters (Oct 28, 2008)

since politics is pretty much human interaction at the societal level I'm not sure how you avoid it. Its the hyperbolic caricature strawmen way of writing the politics you don't agree with that bug me.


----------



## JV (Nov 12, 2013)

Chad Winters said:


> Its the hyperbolic caricature strawmen way of writing the politics you don't agree with that bug me.


Sounds like Stephen Hunter and any piece of fiction by Glenn Beck and Bill O' Reilly...though they tend to deal exclusively in fiction, despite what they may claim.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

Of course, thanks to Poe's Law, sometimes it's hard to tell what's hyperbole and what's a thing that's actually going on.

For example, I have, on occasion used actual laws with the intended target changed to make the evil apparent, and put soundbytes directly from my very own representative directly in the mouth of one of my villains.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Oh, I love fictionalizing real politicians and events. The history of the Fifth Human Empire from my Shattered Empire space opera series draws pretty directly on (West) German postwar politics with a few twists. I keep expecting people to call me out on that - "How can you say that about politician XXX? Don't you know he was/is a great man?" - but so far it never happened.


----------



## JR. (Dec 10, 2014)

Vaalingrade said:


> Of course, thanks to Poe's Law, sometimes it's hard to tell what's hyperbole and what's a thing that's actually going on.


That's what I assumed about your earlier 'fan mail'. I mean... "I'm not racist, but we shouldn't be letting those cat people steal our women." I didn't see it all, of course.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

That was, reversed, the plot of some pulpish sci fi novel I read many moons ago.  Alien cat people and humans desiring them and the cat people being all "I dunno man, I'm not prejudiced, but did you SEE THAT GUY with our women?!"

Something about cat people, I guess.


----------



## Ghostwalk (Nov 1, 2014)

I don't mind characters taking political stances in novels, and I don't even mind a novel's narrator expressing political views. What irritates me a bit is when the author makes up a fictional scenario that takes place in their story, and then uses that scenario to justify their political views.

A deliberately non-political example would be a book I read a while ago that had a scene where somebody working in a shop was acting like a complete idiot to the protagonist. The author in the guise of an omniscient narrator broke in at the end of the scene to say, basically, 'this is why standards are declining in our civilisation, because we let people get away with being this stupid and obstructive'.

And I thought, 'no, the scene that's just happened is something you've invented. It never happened and it's clearly massively exaggerated even if it was based on a real event you once experienced'. He was essentially promoting his view of society by acting as though his own fiction was evidence that society was a certain way. If I complain about a book being too political, that sort of thing is usually what I mean.


----------



## Dactyl (Dec 27, 2014)

coolpixel said:


> i am deeply interested in politics but my books are all politically neutral.
> 
> books make money for me.
> 
> ...


Novels about dystopian societies can be extremely political and still produce a good income for the author. Think _1984_ among others.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

And despite writing love letters to Ayn Rand, Terry Goodkind's fantasy does exceptionally well.  

Also, I guess because I see plenty of tradpub and indie stuff that is super ultra political, and not great selling, but heavily promoted, I am pretty wary of the whole "I'm not political" schtick.  Fish never can tell that they're in water.


----------



## Vaalingrade (Feb 19, 2013)

JR. said:


> That's what I assumed about your earlier 'fan mail'. I mean... "I'm not racist, but we shouldn't be letting those cat people steal our women." I didn't see it all, of course.


I'm not entirely sure that guy even knew she was a cat person. If they hadn't figured out that the lady with a 12ft wingspan and fire breath isn't Caucasian*, I'm not sure if they noticed much of anything.

*Also, as far as I know, there is no Caucus Mountain Range in that world...


----------



## Dactyl (Dec 27, 2014)

TheCasualCalifornian said:


> Personally, I think politics is a waste of time when it comes to writing.


To each his own, I guess. I recall having to read Sophocles' _Antigone_ in freshman English. I wasn't too happy with the assignment, but after reading it and taking the test, the way Sophocles handled the clash between Creon and Antigone has influenced me in many ways, including my writing. Sophocles didn't seem to me to have chosen sides but handled the perspectives of the two main characters perfectly. It has been many years now since I first read it, but I use it as a model in writing conflicts into my stories. Far from avoiding ideological clashes between a protagonist and an antagonist, I am drawn to them to see if I can't represent two or more sides fairly and accurately in my fiction. It is a different story when it comes to arguing a position one holds and has to be written in a non-fiction narrative.

I'm curious. Would you consider _The Help_ a political work and if so, would you consider it "a waste of time?"


----------



## Eric S. Kim (Oct 22, 2014)

Dactyl said:


> I'm curious. Would you consider _The Help_ a political work and if so, would you consider it "a waste of time?"


I've never read it, but I think I'll check it out.


----------



## von19 (Feb 20, 2013)

Yes


----------



## Flay Otters (Jul 29, 2014)

Of course, domestic help has been around since time immemorial; along with stories of secret vengeance wreaked by wronged servants upon their masters (and mistresses).
However, by racializing the story, the Help is made "political."
It is a shibboleth for goodthinkers everywhere, to feel comfortable nestled in the bosom of the zeitgeist.

The reason a dystopian story can be successful across the board, while still being ragingly political, is that the politics is at one remove (unless you don't think white guys should squire cat girls!). 
Once you are off-world or post-apocalypse you have renegotiated the zeitgeist.
Once zombies are after a taste of your brains it is a-okay to behead them as creatively as possible.
(NB. I recommend the BBC series "In the Flesh" which takes the opposite viewpoint, that the zombies are only suffering from Partially Deceased Syndrome and need to be reintegrated into the general population - hilarity, brains and all kinds of politics ensue).

What I am getting at is that politics is fine, and is as much a plot driver as emotion, violence and sex, as a creator of conflict.
The problem, for me, is when the correct politics of the story is assumed from the get-go – when we already know who the goodthinkers are and who the crimethinkers are – and we don't get to see both sides of the story.

That is to say; because of the way it is written, 1984 is a warning or a how-to book depending on your political bent.


----------



## storyteller (Feb 3, 2014)

That's why Brave New World is frankly more interesting-- it is far subtler in that "political" regard than 1984, but that aspect is still dominant.


----------



## Flay Otters (Jul 29, 2014)

Hutchinson said:


> That's why Brave New World is frankly more interesting-- it is far subtler in that "political" regard than 1984, but that aspect is still dominant.


Indeed.


----------



## Mr. Sparkle (Oct 8, 2014)

I think politics will seep into your work no matter what genre it's in.

For instance, if you're a fantasy writer and all of your stories have white protagonists and inhabit pseudo-medieval Western European cultures with mysteriously few people of color in them, I'm going to know either that you're conservative or the type of liberal who believes in "color-blindness." If your planet has an all-male white tribe attacking the peace-loving matriarchal society and Destroying All That Is Good, I'm pretty sure you're left of center if you don't write it in a sardonic tone of voice.

Personally, I like more nuance. For the opposite of nuance (and good writing in general), see Brad Thor's ACT OF WAR.

In fact, for political junkies, it's pretty easy to pick up someone's political leanings from keywords and phrases used in writing. "Code words" as relating to race in politics, for example, is just one variant of a phenomenon that occurs all of the time in speech. Certain themes also tend to pop up.

Examples of phrases, some code words, others just considered doublespeak by one political party or another, not in order: "Self reliance." "Bible thumper." "Appeasement." "Big business /oil / money." "Groupthink / Newspeak." "Family values." (Lulz) "All-American / real American." "Maximalist / fundamentalist." "Red blooded / blue blooded." "Work together." "Law and order." "Right to privacy." "Inner city." "Culture of dependency." "Special interests." "Hard work / culture of work." (when used to imply others never do it) "Entitlement / entitled." "Ideologue." "Crime." "Welfare." "Invest in / investments." 

Examples of plots: Anything that extrapolates into the future based on global warming being real, even though there is no debate among scientists as to its reality - probably be written by a liberal. Rugged individual with lots of guns is smarter than the mobs of panicking idiots in the city when the apocalypse hits - conservative / libertarian. Unfettered capitalism rules the world and it's a good thing - Randian libertarian. Jerk commander wants to nuke the aliens and it's a terrible idea and he gets his comeuppance - liberal. "Idiocracy"-like future dystopia - depressed progressive. Romance where vampire hero hunts down rapists because they deserve the death penalty - mostly apolitical but right of center. May vote Democratic but has a conservative spouse. Communism is The Worst Thing Evar... you get the idea.

Yes, sometimes it's harder to tell whether a trend, eg. the remake of "Red Dawn," "Olympus Has Fallen," and "White House Down" movies, is just a bunch of producers choosing scripts they think will sell or promoting works they personally like (and in movies, it's usually the former).

Basically, while I know the overall plot arc will probably express some of my personal values, unless the character is a preachy one, I try my darnedest to avoid political speeches. If there are consequences to a belief, let there be an explanation behind it, not an assumption that having that belief will always end badly.


----------



## JR. (Dec 10, 2014)

I'm going to have you 'analyse' my works as they come out...


----------



## Jonathan C. Gillespie (Aug 9, 2012)

Flay Otters said:


> Indeed.


Having not read _Brave New World_ yet (it's on my list), but having read _Nineteen Eighty-Four_, this is a dramatic claim to make. You could very well be correct, but I found Orwell's work to be the best book I've ever read, warts and all. It was bold and in your face, but it was brave, and either way Orwell correctly forecasted where nation states were going to take propaganda and information management. I don't think we can always claim the subtle is better than the overt (even though I favor the subtle, and its my usual approach) if the overt happens to be so prescient.

Plus, the scenes with his mother and sister. My gosh. Those are haunting.

To an earlier point, though: yes, if you're going to go bold, you'd better not reduce your targets to straw men and stereotypes. Even the worst people in the world *generally* believe they are doing what's in the best interests of their people. Not always, but usually.


----------



## abishop (May 22, 2014)

All of my favourite writers have politics that come through in their writing: Dostoevsky, Vonnegut, Orwell, etc. The best novel that I read last year (_A Hologram For the King_ by Dave Eggers) is about the hollowing out of the American manufacturing economy. I can't imagine what these authors' books would even be like if they tried to hide their politics.

That said, I think you can write about politics in a way that has nuance. One of the central characters in my WIP is a Cabinet Minister in a Conservative Canadian government. I'm pretty left-wing and the story reflects that, but my goal is still to make the Conservatives sympathetic and human. "Sometimes generally good people do bad things" is a much more interesting way of approaching characters than "the bad guys are awful and the good guys are pure."


----------



## Jonathan C. Gillespie (Aug 9, 2012)

In the United States, I think, we no longer have politics. We have partisanship.


----------



## JV (Nov 12, 2013)

Jonathan C. Gillespie said:


> Having not read _Brave New World_ yet (it's on my list), but having read _Nineteen Eighty-Four_, this is a dramatic claim to make. You could very well be correct, but I found Orwell's work to be the best book I've ever read, warts and all. It was bold and in your face, but it was brave, and either way Orwell correctly forecasted where nation states were going to take propaganda and information management. I don't think we can always claim the subtle is better than the overt (even though I favor the subtle, and its my usual approach) if the overt happens to be so prescient.
> 
> Plus, the scenes with his mother and sister. My gosh. Those are haunting.
> 
> To an earlier point, though: yes, if you're going to go bold, you'd better not reduce your targets to straw men and stereotypes. Even the worst people in the world *generally* believe they are doing what's in the best interests of their people. Not always, but usually.


I see 1984 thrown around in politics a lot these days, mostly by the Republican party. I loved that book. I always find it ironic when those on the right bring it up though, since George Orwell was a Democratic Socialist. They also tend to misinterpret Animal Farm as a condemnation of Socialism as well when, in reality, it was a condemnation of Stalin specifically. It just goes to show that when it comes to politics, much like religion, people will see what they want.


----------



## Colhane (Dec 20, 2014)

I don't like writing that comes with an obvious political bias. I didn't shy away from politics in my story, but with 90% of the earth's population dead and the rest reduced to animals, the story gave me a vehicle to strip away the hubris and allow the characters to express their core values. As a wilderness survival instructor I have seen that process countless times. What you believe and who you are comes to the surface quickly when others depend on you and you need their help. There is truth in the core values of both the right and left. 

The essence of politics is "getting things my way" and will always create conflict. Conflict is good for fiction.  That can set up interesting tension between characters. As a writer, the last thing I want to do is set up tension between me and the reader by injecting my politics, or my worldview, in a way that takes them out of the world I'm creating for them and reminds them of the one they are escaping from. My first intention is entertainment.  If the reader comes away thinking deeper about his own life or beliefs then I'm happy for that, but if he doesn't enjoy the story I will have failed.


----------

