I subscribe to just about every science fiction and fantasy podcast, both the pro-zines and the semipro-zines, and on Saturdays I listen to all of the episodes from the last week while making waffles or doing chores. Since there’s usually about a dozen stories to listen to, and I rarely have the time to get through them all, I’m not shy about skipping a story when it becomes too boring, or too graphic, or too preachy, or if the sound quality is too poor.
Today, while listening to episode #36A of Uncanny Magazine, one of the editors started it off with this:
Well, Lynn, summer’s nearly done… it went into a, um, sad chasm of hopelessness and pandemic. Yay! I hope everyone out there is doing okay and holding on best they can, um, you know, there’s, it seems to be pretty much daily bad news or troubling news, but, you know, we are still fighting back, you know, make sure that you are registered to vote and you can go vote if you can in America and hopefully some things will improve once we change this regime into actual reasonable humans, so…
At this point, I rolled my eyes and skipped the episode. It really is insufferable when these crunchy progressive types bring their politics into everything that they try to create.
But it got me thinking: I don’t always hate it when people bring their politics into their fiction. In fact, I listened to an episode of Clarkesworld soon after this one that had some very alarmist undertones about climate change, but I listened to the end and thought it was a very good story. And I don’t think the editor who went off about the election was trying to gaslight his audience, or being at all insincere. So what was it about the episode of Uncanny that really turned me off?
(It’s an especially relevant question, because I recognize completely that I have a tendency to be that guy. I don’t always try to inject my politics into everything, but it does tend to come on strongly when I do, which is one of the reason why I’ve turned this blog into a place to discuss politics: so that I can get it out in a place where the people who want to read it can find it, and keep it out of my other reader-facing activities, so that the people who don’t want to read this stuff don’t have to.)
After thinking about it some more, I realized that the thing that got to me was how the comment from this editor deliberately failed to acknowledge that people like me exist. Both of my parents are Democrats. I voted for Obama in 2008. By the end of his second term, I vowed never to vote for another Democrat again. In 2016, I voted third party because I didn’t think Trump was fit to be president. But since then, I’ve come to realize that I misjudged the man, and that his enemies in politics and the news media are so batshit fucking insane that they are going to burn this country to the ground unless Trump wins in a landslide in November (and even then, I’m not so sure they won’t burn it all down anyway).
I recognize that there are good and reasonable people who disagree with me, but here’s the thing… I recognize that there are good and reasonable people who disagree with me. Does this editor? Apparently not.
And here’s another thing: even if Trump is the second coming of Hitler, there were good and reasonable people in Weimar Germany who were deceived by the Nazi propaganda machine into believing that Hitler was their only hope. The people at the time who recognized this, like Bonhoeffer and Sebastian Haffner, didn’t just dismiss their fellow countrymen. On the contrary: they were not afraid to make a deep and honest inquiry to understand exactly how Hitler and the Nazis came to power. Have these crunchy progressive types made such a deep and honest inquiry? The vast majority have not.
But it’s not just people like me that these Trump-deranged people aren’t willing to acknowledge. They often fail to acknowledge reality itself. How often have you heard them say “mostly peaceful protests?” How often have you heard them claim that Antifa doesn’t exist? Or here’s a good one that I’ve recently started to hear: there is no such thing as cancel culture, and no one can point to a single person who has been successfully canceled. I suppose the book So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed is just a figment of my imagination—that, or Jon Ronson is a white supremacist. Probably both.
And that’s when I realized that it isn’t the politics that turns me off. It’s the gaslighting.
I’m actually just fine with listening to people whose politics differ from my own, so long as they acknowledge the good and reasonable people like me who disagree with them. That’s why I have no problem listening to Tim Pool, or Joe Rogan, or Eric Weinstein. I’m hungry for it, even, because I recognize that so many of my other news sources skew so far to the right.
The conventional wisdom says that you shouldn’t ever discuss politics if you want to have a writing career. But I don’t think that’s precise enough. Rather, I think that you should never do anything to alienate your audience. That may mean avoiding politics, if that’s not what they’ve come for, but science fiction is the genre of ideas, including political ideas. We never would have had 1984 or Animal Farm if George Orwell had kept to the conventional wisdom about not discussing politics.
I’m sure that there are readers out there who are so disgusted with my politics that they’ll never buy any of my books after discovering this blog. But are they my audience? Probably not. Then again, there are other readers who probably disagree very strongly with my politics—readers like me and Uncanny Magazine—who are still willing to read my books, so long as I don’t alienate them by pretending they don’t exist.
On the other hand, I’m sure I have other readers like me who are sick and tired of all the gaslighting from the left, and are hungry for stories that push back against the reality-denying political narratives that currently dominate the field. They may be able to tolerate fiction that doesn’t take a side either way, but what they’re really hungry for are stories that tell them “no, you’re not the crazy one.”
At the very least, we want stories that acknowledge that we exist.
Democrats see works like “1984” and “Harrison Bergeron,” that warn of the evils of socialism, as instruction manuals on how to order and operate the world, with themselves exempted from the rules.
Tell me the Left isn’t trying to bring about 1984:
“Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.” – George Orwell, 1984