Hey, I buy Gene Wolfe’s books don’t I?

A lot of people our age (mid-20s) get put off politics because it doesn’t seem to be about or addressed to us, and when people write from a political slant in fiction, it still struggles to connect – it doesn’t seem to concern us. (The only authors I’ve really connected with have been Orwell and Robert Harris; personally I think Mieville’s overrated.) From what I’ve seen this has only changed since the financial meltdown – there are so many people who’ve graduated with good degrees who spent months last year unemployed, and are now either still unemployed and made to feel like scum for signing on or in shit jobs because its all they could get. And what’s worse is that once we do start paying attention to what the politicians are saying, they don’t seem to be talking to our generation – it’s all aimed at middle aged, middle class, middle england; basically our parents. Now that Torgeddon is finally here, I doubt that’s going to change. Any discussion outside of fiction that get’s people engaged has to be a good thing, but I wonder if authors are put off because they’re not interested themselves, or they’re worried their audience isn’t interested. Why haven’t you commented more on the election? Are you interested in it? Did you vote?

In all seriousness, I don’t let an authors political or religious leanings get in the way as long as they aren’t a dick about it. For example, I have no problem reading Wolfe despite the fact he is pretty much the opposite of me in moderate poles (as the actual opposite would be a facist not a republican I guess). I won’t read militant sci-fi for most of the reasons Moorcock identifies in “Starship Stormtroopers”, and if the writer is a homophobic moron like Card, I’ll give that a pass as well.

I am of the opinion, that despite my many fiercely held opinions, and my willingness to bore others to tears with them -that discussion is ultimately pointless.

I think this sad, but I have yet to be convinced that I’m wrong in this er, fiercely held opinion.

At least, this is the case with politics. How can there be any rational discussion about what is such a groaningly corrupt and undemocratic system? I believe above all else, that money, and the interests who view all money, – yours, mine, theirs, and every last pence and resource existent in the universe to mint it, as their fundamental right to steal if they don’t already own it, to be a major hurtle to anyone making a difference outside of armed, in the streets, bloody insurrection.

Britain in this aspect, I feel is no different. Short of killing off all the politicans and their handlers, what chance do any amount of mere words have? The pen being mightier than the sword was penned in the days when people still fought with swords. Try stopping weapons grade enriched plutonium warheads with a sharpie if you think I’m not in earnest.

As for writers, we live in a society that either does not read at all and hence do not value the opinions of mere scribblers, or read as a form of escapism and pleasure -rarely for the radical transformation of their set views regarding the universe, themselves, or least of all, the political systems they apathetically take part in (if they can manage to smuggle their votes past the rampant electoral fraud that is status quo in most regions of the globe).

While I applaud Mark for his commitment, I question whether anyone other than a fellow writer, in our current age, could think their opinion can change things. This is not to diminish what Mark or anyone else has to say, or to throw sand on their laudable instincts. I just don’t think that it can do anything, other than provide a lively topic to fill up the comments section of one’s blog.

I read blogs, so at least it is good for me. But change things? Go on, challenge me with your Parker special limited gold edition – so long as I can bring an M40 to the discussion.

We’ll change the world eventually, right after we destroy it.

Eric

GRRM does quite a bit of political soapboxing on his blog, and to be honest, he’s a bit more liberal than I am.

But, because I have such respect for him as an author, our differences in political views don’t stop me from being a fan.

I’d go so far as to suggest, likewise, that having strong political opinions won’t sway those who are engaged by your work.

Then again, it’s relative. If your political beliefs involve sacrificing puppies and newborn babes in a blood ritual to increase your book sales – some may be less than tolerant.

Everyone seems to be avoiding talking about it. I hear nothing in coffee bars. Nothing from relatives (my probably Tory voting Dad did not call me to crow). I think most people feel a bit subdued. Over on LJ there is also a dampening effect because the US folks aren’t very interested so conversations are being held by about a third of our friends lists.

I tend to mouth off about politics (and religion) on a fairly regular basis, wrote my latest monthly BSC Review column on Brown’s “bigoted woman” comment versus Duffy’s “flocking” (and posted it on election day), and spent the election Twittering bile at the BNP votes. So, yeah, not about to give a fuck if people don’t read my books cause I’m a mouthy bastard. But in terms of talking about the results of this election? Man, I’m too scunnered by it to say much more than, “Theresa fucking May? For fuck’s sake, kill me now. Please.”

Aren’t authors just people? If you prick them, do they not bleed?

I think it rather strange to ask whether authors should openly discuss politics, as if there is some moral code to the profession that forbids having a political opinion. (There isn’t, is there? Else I’ll need to retract some queries and quick…)

Speaking from the position of living in the politically most fucked up country of Europe(*): people hide their opinions in the closet like confused homosexual youngsters. Like Farah said, there simply isn’t enough discussion in public. Not the good party/bad party kind, not election time fever debate in the coffee room at work. But the simple everyday talk about what matters in life and how and why this or no party at all fits that set of values. The kind of talk that furthers your own thinking about these values when confronted with someone else’s ideas. Why not make a haphazard comment linking the sad state of the photocopier to some recent political incident? I think the state of politics would improve immensely if there would be more open talk (not discussion, not debate, just talk) about where you yourself stand as a person.

Perhaps people (still) fear getting physically or verbally punched on the nose. Discussions can run deep and hot, true enough, but real voter militancy is of the past. A voter looks in the parties for the best fit, and doesn’t look to be converted for life. All political programs have gaps, compromise is the active verb of a democracy. All talk about some politician or party should be instilled with a critical mass of sarcasm, even if it’s them getting your vote, just because the compromise starts with the voter himself.

(*) We’ve had three years of true non-government, and half of the legislative work done in that period was stopped short of signing by the government’s fall and will have to be redone under the new government. I’m just hoping June 13th won’t be Groundhog Day, because we’ve had enough of groundhogs lately.

To tell you the truth, sometimes I sort of miss the days before the internet (or at least before the internet boomed in a big way during the previous decade) where you couldn’t just find out the intricacies of an author’s political beliefs and what they had for breakfast via a quick Google of Twitter, blogs, and interviews – they had more of a mystique. To paraphrase Burial an author then was more “untrackable, unreadable, just a distant light”. I suppose it’s an odd thing for an English Lit student to say, given that we’re taught to seek context and biographical info…

Sounds a bit churlish really, as if I’m suggesting that fiction writers should just stay in that one particular box and function as fiction-creating machines. Not sure what I am trying to say really (if anything), just that for all the good, healthy debate and so on that we have, I still miss the mystique a little. It’s partly why, although I’m well aware of his well-documented Socialist beliefs, I like Miéville’s style of blogging and relatively reserved online presence. Less really can sometimes be more.

I just wish there were more Liberation Theologist bloggers out there. Anybody know of any?