ON NEUTRALITY AS AN AUTHOR
Switzerland, you either get the joke or you don't... I have been asked a lot about this recently and, I think, it is the highly divisive colour of today's political world that has made it an issue.
Let us be frank, never in my life have I seen people so polarised on 'issues' for such a long time. I have also never seen so many politicians unashamedly lying (on both sides).
Perhaps the rise of social media is to blame, perhaps social media simply makes it easier to see, I am no expert. Now, from observation through my 43 years on this fine planet and as one blessed (unlike many active political commentators) with a fine memory, I recall much about how celebrities enjoy sharing their opinion when they believe it matters.
Celebrity Political Activism is Nothing New
The famous have used their platform to espouse their position, their cause, and their passionate beliefs, for a cause that they feel needs attention. No-one told Bob Geldof to get back to singing when he campaigned for Band Aid. Today though, the question is raised and done so seriously, should those who are about to be famous stay neutral?
Let me clarify on that clumsy attempt at a Gladiator pun; the writer's world has changed. We future bestsellers now take to social media to "build a presence", to get known, create a following, and to market our works among other things. We build followers (fellow writers mostly but some 'ordinary' folks too) on Facebook, on Twitter, on Instagram, and all the others. We have (we hope) our devoted legions hanging on our ever word and meme.
We have a presence and a platform. We're also people and we have opinions about the current state of the world. Be it Trump, corruption, Brexit, Hilary, Russia, Turkey, or the constant televisual assault of reality shows, we all have an opinion on them.
The Keyboard Warrior Arises
In today's society of like, share, retweet, and forward encourages us to comment more. Divisive and often objectionable opinion is easier to express from a safe and almost anonymous remove. What would possibly get me a punch in the nose on the street will get me no more than a block online.
So, that means it's ok to say what we like about this public figure or that one, attack or defend one political stance or another with vim and verve? What do you think? No, seriously, I'm asking you. Please comment below, I'd love to hear your opinion. I think calm and considered discourse is something we should see a lot more of these days, especially if we disagree. Should we, then, be neutral? I don't think we should. As the dying male relative told the teenage human-animal hybrid "with great power comes great responsibility" and I personally believe this to be true.
Let's be honest with ourselves here; hands up any of you that have kept your personal biases completely and utterly out of your work. LGBTQ folks with 0 LGBTQ characters, people other than Caucasian with only white characters. Those who've lived with mental illness or abuse who don't mention those themes. Does your YA not challenge the patriarchal and totalitarian government or criticise the terrible decisions of past generations? Come on, I'd like to move on here...
True Neutrality?
I have been accused somewhat of unflatteringly representing a certain former New York businessman turned supposedly most powerful man in the world in The Preludes of Enoch. Oddly enough, I wrote that scene prior to Trump's emergence onto the political scene and added the scene into the Preludes with only minor continuity editing. I wrote about the type of politician or figure that person, it would appear, resembles rather strongly. I wrote about a biracial female President proceeding him because, well, I think it'd do America a lot of good to have one of those. I'm also Irish/British so I thought the idea of Americans having free healthcare is a fine one.
It appears that some real world people either agreed with me or did not. Funny how that happens, right? I did let my own experiences and the opinions formed from living them colour my writing. I lived close to 11 years (legally I must add) in America and saw much from the outsider's perspective. I am a deeply moral person and was quite distressed on how things such as race, gender, and social class are treated and still hotly debated there, usually with great passion. Often with much anger directed towards the 'opposition'. You might call me a Liberal, many people have, and I accept the honour because I am, according to the dictionary definition of that word. I plan to make things up for a living, if that isn't liberal minded then I don't know what is.
Other people have asked me about whether they should 'self-edit' their online Author Persona in order to maintain the illusion of neutrality and keep such rants limited to their personal accounts. If that's what you want then all power to you, I respect that and I understand, especially those of you who operate under a pseudonym or hold important positions. I see the risks. Yet, to me personally, that feels dishonest. I write with my whole heart about things which matter to me.
As you can see, my personal biases shape my writing. The Chronicles is coloured by questions I have often asked or wondered about on important issues. They are not just social commentary or political rant though, it's possible they'll appeal more to people of certain mindsets than others but I try to keep my references both subtle and, I hope, intelligent.
I also try to not make characters who espouse the opposite opinion to the one I myself hold two dimensional villains either. I was once told by a rather clever man that if one cannot convincing argue against one's own opinion, one has no right to defend said opinion or, at least will do so better.
So, Not Neutrality but Balance then?
Yes. And also no. I think we, outside of our books, are not only allowed but behoved to make good use of our audience but not simply for our own gain.
Let me explain; I believe, as you might have noticed, in balance; karma and dharna if you will. I think we're supposed to give back and use our current or future influence positively. Not everyone is going to agree with you, it's an inescapable fact of life, but there's no reason to treat them with the same way they may treat you. That's karma too and, I think, we often forget that. You don't treat people as they treat you, you treat them as you WANT them to treat you, even if they don't. Nobody ever said it was going to be easy.
I have found in my personal life that the best way to kill anger is with kindness, most people will either apologise or get bored and wander off if you refuse to reciprocate their anger. So, coming back from that tangent, what does that mean for us writers? @StephenKing has no qualms about telling us his opinions of the current US government, neither does @annericeauthor among others. They receive a lot of criticism for it but, again, I paraphrase the wise; if your opinion cannot stand up to criticism, you do not deserve to have it. I think we must be true, honest and forthright in any persona we inhabit in our quest to become mass murderers of whole (sustainably maintained) forests.
We have a responsibility to champion causes we see as just. We simply have to be respectful about it. We claim to be, as writers, intelligent, nuanced, and educated people so this SHOULD present no problems to us. Should it?
The Rebel Artist
In my opinion artists of all kinds have always been rebels to a degree, their often motivation to write being to educate people and share things which really, really matter through the medium of their story. Painters paint the world as they see it and hope to help you see it too. The best books are, after all, the ones that you put down with an "Aaaaaaah!" of wonderment and a slight smile.
Comments