Smart Bitches, Trashy Books

In my opinion, it is all right if an author is interested in politics (and expresses her or his opinion in their works). Most authors are interested in politics indeed, and I am not an exception.

This presidential election will be interesting, I do believe.

I’m ok with anyone in the public eye when it stays “this is what I believe.” When it crosses the line into “this is what I believe AND anyone that disagrees with me is uneducated and ignorant” then I hit the mute button.

I am also one of those people that stops financially supporting people when I think they are asshats. It’s happened with something I read here on this very blog. Haven’t bought another one of said author’s works since.

Wow, suddenly everyone’s talking about that Scalzi article. I blogged about it here, and Jordan Summers did here.

I am also one of those people that stops financially supporting people when I think they are asshats.

And therein lies the problem for writers, especially women. Say what you like, but if we don’t like how you say it, then we’ll punish you for it. Funny how no one ever grandly tells John Scalzi they won’t ever read his books again because of his opinions.

Personally, I’ve decided I agree with Scalzi, I don’t give a monkey’s left testicle if people dislike my method of expression or the subject of my expression, and expecting authors to churn out stories and sit in a corner wearing a painted on grin and a gag the rest of the time, is an insult. Politics and opinions go with brains and talent and creativity. Deal with it.

And deal with the fact that what you think is the correct mode of behaviour in any given situation, is only applicable to you and possibly your offspring. Unless you’re my mother, don’t tell me how to talk and what about. ‘Wouldn’t it be nice if everyone was nice’ works in a Disney movie. It’s not the law of the land.

Now cue a whole bunch of people lining up to say, “oh, we believe authors should be able to say what they want, but we want them to be polite about it.” I’ve spent most of the day reading variations on that theme.

Politics in romance novels ahs worked for me sometimes - like Karyn Langhorne’s Unfinished Business or Jennifer Crusie’s Strange Bedpersons. I think it was because those were both evenhanded: it wasn’t the author on a soapbox, it was two real characters with two really different opinions and netiher one was presented as being a terrible, evil person for believing that way.

But both of these books were explicitly about people who were exact opposites, including politics - and it even says that on the back cover blurb. In other situations, especially ones were a person’s politics are supposed to serve as shorthand for whether or not they’re a good person, it’s gratuitous and anoying. You know - “Jenny disliked him on sight - an oily, smarmy, slicked-back businessman who probably voted Republican and evicted babies in his free time.” Or the ones where the discussion has no connection to the plot and exists entirely for the author to stick their personal cause in your face. (“The jewel thief sighed as she pocketed the bracelet, and wished that more people would buy fuel-efficient vehicles.”)

Romance novels often deals with difficult subjects like depressions, rape, childlessness and death. These are sensitive subjects, and if you are able to handle them, then why shy away from politics.

I as a reader don’t care if a favorite author thinks differently than me on certain matters, if I enjoy the books, I’ll still read them. And I might enjoy the debate.

Why shouldn’t authors be able to make their voices heard, when actors and other celebrities can? I would say, bring it on, express your opinion.

I am not an author. But this is an issue I’m struggling with in my own life as an academic.

I live in a key swing state (PA), and would love to volunteer for the Obama campaign. There are two problems with this. First, I’m OMGHOLYSHIT drowning in work. That’s the main problem. Second, I’m afraid my political activities, if discovered by students, could be used as an argument against me, should they decide to challenge their grades.

In the classroom, I do my very best not to show my strong preference for one candidate or political party over the other, to the extent that I think I sometimes overcompensate in trying to be nice about McCain. I’ve slipped up from time to time, like when one of my students said something about Hillary fans going for Sarah Palin, and I replied, automatically, “God, I hope not.” And then I apologized.

There’s still a lot of controversy over the supposed liberal bias in academia, and someone like me, just at the start of her career, has to be very careful about not coming off as attempting to “indoctrinate” her students. And because the university I’m at has faced a lot of scrutiny from David Horowitz’s academic “freedom” group, I feel like Big Brother is looking over my shoulder all the time.

(Heh. Not signed in, and my captcha? free31. Appropriate as always)

I think authors are as entitled to take public political stands as anyone else.
In fact, many of my books end up political, even when they don’t mean to, simply because the characters are gay.

I post a lot about politics from the PoV of a queer, blue-collar pagan women. Because politics directly affect me, directly affect my kids (queer=/=not married) and directly affect my job.

I try to stay calm and level-headed because ranting and raving accomplishes nothing.  I’d much rather read a well-thought-out piece that is totally wrong-headed than a piece I agree with that froths at the mouth and chews the walls.

And, of course, I reserve the right not to financially support authors whop are trying bring about my destruction. (Orson Scott Card, I’m looking at YOU!)

out38… yep. The bot nails it again.

my .02…

My LiveJournal is titled “where personal and professional life collide” for a reason—we cover a wide spectrum of topics, including food, politics, religion and yes, writing, mainly because those are all things I’m interested in.

My feeling is that I’m here to learn as well a pontificate, so I ask people to bring their best game to the discussion.  The rules are simple: play nice, respect the other person’s idiotic opinion, and don’t be a schmuck.  So far, it’s been working….

If a reader can’t differentiate the-person from the-books, then they probably should stay away from blog in the first place!  There are a number of writers whose personal beliefs are so counter to mine as to be alien. They’re still fabulous writers and most of the time I can tune out what they’re saying and just read the damn book.

I keep my political thoughts AWAY from the computer because it is essentially my workplace. I think there’s time and place for everything, and voicing my political opinion doesn’t belong in my workspace. FOR ME. Not in the normal discussion that politics typical occur (which is usually off some tangent that didn’t have any point to the main blog thread). If I was to come across a political blog, then I’d be more likely to comment.

I also have the mindset that I don’t want to give readers a reason NOT to buy me when I do sell. It sounds farfetched, but it’s not. It’s happened with me with an author. There’s an agent I was liking. Until she started showing her political colors. In both cases it wasn’t WHAT they were expressing but how (as mentioned above) they did it that rubbed me wrong. I don’t want that rubbing against the grain happening with someone else because of me.

If I was established, I might have a different mindset.

right58. Hm. It’s my right to voice my opinion 58 times, or not if I don’t want to.

The billionaires, they don’t lose their shirts or invest in sub prime mortgages in Harlequin Presents’ world.

Gotta love boredom at work - http://pics.livejournal.com/lezlishae/pic/0026zg75/

I’ve been struggling with this, discussing it with other writer friends who blog.  We all go back and forth about the worry over alienating readers.  I have very strong feelings about this election, but I’ve done little more than put up an Obama icon and twitter a bit during debates. 

There are days I want to do a lot more, but my agent is currently marketing my first book and the possibility of alienating an editor is making me hesitate.  I’ve worked too hard to blow it over my urge to run my mouth. ;)  And right now, that can be so, so difficult.  Especially when my children tell me the horrifying things kids are saying at school.

I blogged a little bit on my recent political awakening after I was lectured in my own basement by the furnace repairman. This is an extraordinary political year with a sharply divided nation. I’m pretty strong (if quiet) with my convictions, and I remember my parents telling me to NEVER discuss politics and religion. I haven’t always paid attention, but in this case, I think they’re right. There is little I can do to persuade someone whose mind is made up. There is another infamous pig saying—-never wrestle in the mud with a pig; you’ll both get dirty and the pig will enjoy it. I think it’s best to keep one’s politics to oneself in Romancelandia, particularly if you are published and don’t want to alienate readers/buyers. Maybe that makes me a chicken—-or a pig. But I’m doing a voter registration drive in the high school I work in.

I’m going to look at this from a different angle. YES we all have the right to our own opinions and can blog about it all we want.

BUT I think we’re in the world of romance where readers want an escape from hearing about politics and even arguing about them. What are romance books? An escape. A chance to read something that will whisk us away from this world to another and has a HEA that makes us feel good. Then it’s time to go back to the real world and deal with real world problems.

Our job as romance writers is not to preach, but to give our readers something that makes them feel good.

Another thing is that all of these topics are being talked to friggin’ death on every TV channel, every radio station, every newspaper you read. God, can’t we have a friggin’ break?

IMO that’s what we provide. A break. For those who want to blog about it, go for it. But I think we’re doing a disservice to our readers who’ve had enough of all the $%&# going on right now that they need their “Calgon take me away” moments. I sure don’t want to hear about it everywhere, including romance blogs.

I sure hope SmartBitches doesn’t start providing info or debate on politics. I think this blog is just right the way it is. It’s fun, informative, and very rarely is there ever any kind of debate. Please, no more debates!

My word is wrong52, meaning mixing politics with romance readers is the wrong thing to do!

I think there is also a difference between “politics”, which is everything to do with how people and groups relate to each other and how the society and the economy in which we live works (and so natural territory for any writer of fiction), and “party politics” which is about factionalism and which individuals are up and down in a particular political party. 

I suspect that too often people who say they are bored or alienated by politics, or who have the reaction “this person speaks/votes this way so I hate them” are thinking only in terms of “party politics”, not of politics in the wider individuals/society/government sense.  And I can see that a “commercial” author might be worried that they could lose readers from these groups if they become known for political opinions.  But it’s a shame.

And then of course there’s the whole “can’t tell the difference between real life and the actions/statements of fictional characters” issue.

And I love how Scalzi concludes with a “blow me”. Ha!

Unless I’m tiptoeing around a friend’s feelings, I’ll say what’s on my mind. If it’s not acceptable to someone else, that’s all right. I’ll live. I also believe there’s a difference between sharing an unpopular opinion online and going totally crazy online. Still, I think both have the right to be immortalized on the internet, even if being linked to one is much preferable than being linked to the other.

Angelia, I was just thinking about Orson Scott Card!  There was a big fuss earlier this year in the American Library Association when he won an award for lifetime contribution to young adult literature.  Librarians are a pretty liberal bunch, and there were a lot of people who felt that someone with his opinions didn’t deserve any kind of award, whether or not his opinions were apparent in his work.
I haven’t actually read any of his books (*blush*), although my husband loves Ender’s Game, so I don’t feel qualified to speak to whether his opinions show in his work or not.  But it is an interesting case.

I hate that two people with different political viewpoints keep quiet when around one another because they might…disagree.

Except when visiting my folks, when this is essential. Craziness.

I start my shift volunteering in Obamaland today. Will I blog about it…? Maybe. I think my blog readers know where I stand, mostly coz of choice Daily Show clips I’ve featured, but I don’t make a huge deal out of it in public. Do I obsessively check wonkette and the numberstuds at 538.com? Yes, but that’s my own problem. Anyway, I’m not going to convince anyone via my blog. It’s antagonistic to those who’ve already decided, and my little fangirl squees when Obama takes his coat off (7:30 in on this clip) aren’t going to sway anyone who’s undecided at this point.

Joe getting choked up last night. *sniff*

And, of course, I reserve the right not to financially support authors whop are trying bring about my destruction. (Orson Scott Card, I’m looking at YOU!)

Yeah, I’m looking at him, too.

Scalzi, he rocks. Been reading that dude’s blog for over a year and I still rub my hands with glee every time there’s a new entry on Whatever. He says what he wants to say without ever sounding like a frustrated fathead (unless he means to sound like a frustrated fathead).

I think I agree with Scalzi’s article.  I just draw the line when a story stops being a story and starts being a political endorsement.  If authors have something to say, I think they should say it—isn’t that why they’re writing?  But I can’t stand it when it turns from “this is what I believe” into “vote for [insert candidate] if you want to live.”

What I love is when authors use two or more characters to debate different views.  When you can see both arguments and be informed about both arguments and then chose which side you’re on, that’s just cool.

whereas it’s ok for actors to embrace activism, for authors of commercial fiction, it’s not ok at all.

Except, or because maybe…by and far politically active actors make a lot more money than the average writer.

Out of curiosity then: if a writer you really loved and bought the moment the books were released blogged that she always gave 15% of all monies she earned to political movements againstabortion/anti gay marriage/fill in your own hot button issue are you still going to buy her books?

note: I think any candidate who does not answer the damn question asked of them should lose time to talk. There should be a moderator with time docking power, is all I’m sayin

Aww, but din’cha hear?  That’s what whose there mavericks do when a question gets a little un-comfy.  They’s make up their own rules—and are darned proud of it, I’ll tell ya.  Smile big and wink!

I’m going to have to go with Cheyenne here. I never blog about politics; I don’t even like to talk about politics (although I do have very strong opinions and love watching debates/news commentators/whatever), and I dislike having someone else’s political opinions shoved down my throat. I think it’s rude. Didn’t our mothers teach us not to discuss politics or religion in mixed company?

When I go to an author’s blog I’m looking for stuff about their lives and their books. I want to get to know them better, I hope to have a little fun. I don’t want to be greeted by paragraph after paragraph of “That other party is a bunch of morons, and I can’t believe how much they lie, and they’re all wrong wrong wrong.” It turns me off. Even if I agree with their opinions it turns me off. And I very often won’t buy their books if they say something that really offends me.

I have a hard time believing that someone who can only see those who disagree with them as evil lying blackguards without brains will have the ability to create full, interesting characters in their work. It just strikes me as unimaginative, and why would I spend my money on that?

It’s not that I don’t think they have a right to discuss politics on their blogs. Of course they do, it’s their blog. They have the right to discuss purple-headed sheepcows on their blogs if they want. But I have a right to dislike it, and to stop reading their blogs and their books.

Frankly, I feel the same way about actors being activists. Shut up, I don’t care what you think. When I want to know who you think I should vote for, I’ll call you up and ask. Until then, talk about the movie, talk about your wonderful new marriage or tv show or dogs, and keep your opinions about who should be president to yourself. I’m perfectly capable of making my own decisions without consulting Matt Damon or Bruce Willis.

(Oh, and again as Chey said, I hope SB doesn’t go political. I love being able to hang out in non-political places when elections loom.)

I think we’re in the world of romance where readers want an escape from hearing about politics and even arguing about them. What are romance books? An escape. A chance to read something that will whisk us away from this world to another and has a HEA that makes us feel good.

Romances don’t generally have much about party politics, but they do have a lot in them which is political. Tycoons, billionaires etc don’t just appear out of nowhere: they’re part of the capitalist system. Dukes etc in historicals would have an automatic right to vote in the House of Lords and lots of inherited wealth and privilege. A heroine who has to acquiesce to the hero’s demands because she can’t afford to pay for the urgent operation her child needs to survive make me think about health care provision in whichever country the novel is set in. I recently read a novel in which walking, rather than taking the car, into the centre of a small town in the US was presented as an innovation. That made me think about dependency on petrol and what effect this has on climate change. There’s the almost complete lack of heroines who’ve had abortions but lots of heroines who accidentally get pregnant and then either have secret babies or marry for “convenience.” And then there are the many, many SEALS and other military romances. What do they have to say about the way the US sees itself in the world? Even what the characters eat can be revealing. How many vegetarians do you find in romance, for example?

Lori said:

Out of curiosity then: if a writer you really loved and bought the moment the books were released blogged that she always gave 15% of all monies she earned to political movements againstabortion/anti gay marriage/fill in your own hot button issue are you still going to buy her books?

YES. I always fear this or something like it when I find a new writer that I really love. Could I love the work of someone who supported X party, or political way of thinking, when I am a fervent supporter of Y?

So far it hasn’t happened yet. The writers I really love seem to either keep their political thoughts private (like Neil Gaiman, correct me if I’m wrong) or write books which would seem to indicate that they think the same way as me (Terry Pratchett’s Jingo is a good example - but I don’t know, or really want to know, anything about his personal politics).

I would not buy books by someone who donated all monies to a cause which I disagreed with, but I would want and expect them to publicise that intention. I would wholly support their right to support that cause… just not with my money. In such a situation, I’d just buy their books second-hand, or borrow them.

I’m not sure why people here are off on a tangent about authors discussing their politics in a novel: I think the point of the discussion is about authors expressing their views in other media, such as blogs, interviews and the like.

Although, even in novels, you can certainly get a flavour of someone’s political leanings - gays/blacks/whathaveyous are mentioned positively, women aren’t doormats, men aren’t all Alpha Fuckwits and so on. But I agree that a novel isn’t exactly the place for overt politics, unless it’s a satire or roman a clef - the author is creating a world that we should be entering into. Alluding to current events drops that illusion and really quickly dates the book.

Onto the actual topic. I’m happy if authors talk about their politics. They’re humans, citizens, who presumably have the right to vote (except in some states in the US if you’ve had a conviction 500 years before, apparently) - they also have a right to express their views. I tend to pay attention to how their views are expressed as well as the content. Someone can be a conservative Christian who yet has the proper charity for others and expresses that; yer Falwells et al can burn in the fiery pit they’re so quick to consign others to.

I won’t buy Orson Scott Card either, due to his stated views. But since I don’t like his writing - yes, his religious views seep through his fiction in the way I mentioned earlier (learning about his religious and political background was a big AHA! moment for me) - it’s no loss. I love Laurie R. King (in a pure-yet-authoriarily-devoted-way, and I am nodding along assiduously to her blog posts on various things, including her political views. Although her views are similar to my own, I also appreciate the fact that she doesn’t put others down. Expresses anger at the effects certain views have, yes, but doesn’t descend to their level.

Knowing someone has similar views to my own is just icing on the cake. I only stop reading if someone wants to deny me my civil rights or expresses those few views I can’t compromise with in any way, or is irredeemably sexist/racist/homophobic… and those things seem to show up in their fiction in any case, and renders it unpalatable enough without knowing the specifics.

December, if authors can’t talk about politics, and actors can’t, then who can? Do you really want to leave politics to the politicians?

Political matters affect everyone, in every country. We non-Americans are passionately obssessed with the elections in the USA because it directly affects our future. Frankly, it’s insulting to tell anyone not to talk about something so important. Authors are some of the best educated, thoughtful and open-minded people in a society. Why would you not want them to have views and share them?

My politics, my views are core to who I am and what I write. If someone only wants to talk the bits of me that appeal to them as entertainment, and lock the rest away, then that diminishes my value to society to approximately that of an hour of the Simpsons. Bugger that for a lark.

I don’t really talk about politics, in public or private, but that’s because my strongest opinion on the subject is that they’re all a bunch of asshats.  At least in the US of Holy Shit you have an exciting election race: over here it’s all I can do to stay awake.

Issues are different to me than politics.  I don’t really care which party you vote for, or if you vote at all, but if you tell me gay people should be shot and that you go out of your way to run over cats, I’m afraid I will have to eviscerate you in fiction.  I’d eviscerate you in real life, but, you know, it’s really messy, and I have deadlines.

Nonetheless, I have learned that authors who express strong opinions often discover a pressing need to return to the day job.  Disagree with a reader and they’ll swear to devote the rest of their life to making sure no one evah, evah buys your books again.  Since I don’t write books aimed at petty children, I’m not terribly worried I’ll lose any devout fans, but I figure in general the reason authors keep quiet is that they have bills to pay.

spamfilter: brown57.  How did it know Gordon Brown is the person I was thinking of specifically when I said politics made me sleepy?

I’m in the UK, so at least I get the option of other programs. We are watching open-mouthed, as the USA passes Socialist measures and moves further left, while China and Russia are moving to the right and becoming more capitalist than any other nation.
Weird times, folks.
And the US election seems to be going on forever. In the UK, when a General Election is called, the parties get three weeks (yes you read right, three weeks) to campaign and there’s a cap on their spending. Even that is a bit much sometimes, and you find yourself longing for them to just shut up and get on with it. The interminable year-long campaign with humungous amounts spent on balloons and such.
What I found the worst was the way they can phone you up in your own home and nag you for your vote. That was tried earlier this year by a political party, and the outcry was so bad nobody will try it again in a hurry. Bad enough to get junk mail, people at the door, TV, radio and such, but to call you on the phone?

I’m going to be truly awful and admit that if an author I knew and liked admitted that she was voting for McCain, I’m not sure how I’d feel.  It hasn’t happened—although I haven’t really gone looking—so I don’t know how I’d react, but I can easily imagine a very negative reaction and an inability to read her books from then on.  Then again, I might shrug and say “Oh well” and go on to enjoy future books.  But I’m not sure.  Does that make me a bad person?  Or just partisan?  And does that answer authors’ questions about whether they should blog about it?  I don’t know.

Has Suzanne Brockmann lost more readers than she’s gained by being so open with her politics?  Who knows.  I know I still reader, but then, she’s supporting my guy.  :)

I don’t care if people in general talk politics, declare their affiliations, openly support their candidates or whatever, no matter what the profession.  I think that folks who wear their political hearts on their sleeve need to be aware, though, that not only might some not agree with them (and the sharers must be willing to take whatever consequences - if any - that might bring, whether they be emotional or financial; sharing of any kind is a risk, after all) but that some might merely shrug and not engage and really only end up interested in the book, music, movie, whatever.  That has to be o.k., too.  If I don’t have a political litmus test for authors, I’d like not to be subjected to one as a reader (or listener or viewer or whatever).

and I dislike having someone else’s political opinions shoved down my throat.

Why is someone discussing their political opinions on their personal blog shoving it down your throat? And how is it any different (aside from the fact that politics in this country is always divisive but that shouldn’t stop people from talking about it for fear they might alienate a reader) than someone expressing an opinion about a tv show or their favorite book?

Personally I believe if an author or an actor or anyone wants to discuss politics on their personal blog they can. If they express an opinion I just can’t agree with (e.g. if they are anti-abortion rights) then I’ll stop reading their blog (life’s too short to read the opinions of someone when I know it’ll just make my blood pressure skyrocket) but if it’s someone whose novels I really enjoy it’d probably take a lot more than differing political opinions to make me stop reading them.

If I have the right to blather on about politics in my own personal blog (which I do because it’s important to me) then I don’t see why authors should be required to stay quiet out of fear of offending a reader. Obviously, if an author chooses not to discuss such a hot button issue that is their right but I’m not going tell someone they can’t write about politics in their blog.

Aww, see now, der I go, not answerin’ da queschun.

Me?  I’d love to get political.  I’d love to tell anyone who would listen what I think about this presidential race.  Unfortunately, I also want people to buy my books, and until I’m making George Clooney money, I need to keep the 15 fans I’ve got.

Besides, I’ve never understood the celebrity=political authority equation.  Despite who us Californian’s pick for governors, I can’t seriously see myself voting for anything short of maybe a piracy law because Susan Sarandon thinks I should.

Of course, Jon Stewart, well…he’s a totally different story…..

Great conversation, Sarah. I’m glad you started it.

I’ve stayed away from talking politics on my blog (at least overtly saying who I support, although if one reads carefully, one can easily figure it out~~especially from today’s post) for the most part.

It’s been a conscious decision not so much because I’m afraid of alienating readers, but simply because I like to keep things light and entertaining and I simply don’t want it to devolve into a flaming argument. That’s always been the purpose of my blog—light and fun.

However, I make no secret of my political affiliations in other public venues—such as Twitter, Facebook, etc., or even in my own yard. :-) It’s simply that I don’t blog about it, but believe me…I will talk and debate about it.

And by the way, Lori Borrill, you got a big-ass laugh out of me for this:

  note: I think any candidate who does not answer the damn question asked of them should lose time to talk. There should be a moderator with time docking power, is all I’m sayin

Aww, but din’cha hear?  That’s what whose there mavericks do when a question gets a little un-comfy.  They’s make up their own rules—and are darned proud of it, I’ll tell ya.  Smile big and wink!

spamword: street32: how appropriate for my blog post today about yardsigns.

Btw: go to yardvote.com and register yard sign sightings. They’re trying to track political climate by looking at who’s putting up signs where.

I rarely express political statements because I’m one of those people who loathes politics as they are currently practiced in the US of Holy Shit. Frankly, I expressed to a co-worker last night that I wish our everyday accountants would rise up and wrest the books out of the hands of Congress and straighten them up. I had originally said business leaders, but the only business leader who seems not to have his head in his ass and therefore running his company into the ground is Warren Buffet. And so, the one political statement I will be expressing this year - and every time it’s time to vote about something - is VOTE. You have no right to complain about the state of things if you do not exercise your right to vote. Don’t care much who you vote for, but if you start nattering on about how this country is falling to pieces and then proudly proclaim that you didn’t bother to vote in the last election because what good would it have done/insert lame excuse here, then I have no patience for you.

Political matters affect everyone, in every country. We non-Americans are passionately obssessed with the elections in the USA because it directly affects our future.

Absolutely.  We certainly have the right to express an opinion, because we are affected.  But try criticising either side of the American political spectrum (a somewhat limited spectrum that runs all the way from, umm, indigo to violet, since all American political positions are way to the right of centre), and they will all jump on you and sweepingly accuse you of being anti-American…  I loathe most of our British politicians as well (and they are also all right of centre now)  but that doesn’t mean I am anti-British.

It’s a bit like the way in which members of one family can quarrel bitterly amongst themselves, but will suddenly present a united front if an outsider dares to express a view.

Should authors be able to talk politics on their personal blogs without fear of repercussion?  Maybe in an ideal world, but that’s not how it works in reality.  There is also a difference between a personal blog and a professional one, and if an author is blogging on their official website or finds themselves mostly writing about their upcoming novel and their personal writing process, it may not “fit” to be suddenly proclaiming the virtues of Obama or McCain.

And on a more personal note, I don’t even live in the states, and I’m tired of hearing all the political hoo-hah.  The whole thing is starting to resemble a three-ring circus.  What crazy things will the candidates say today?  Frankly, I’m more than happy to hang out around blogs where the American election is not the word of the day.

Wow. I’m definitely in the minority here. I just read so many things that concern me. It’s okay to buy a writer second hand because you don’t want to give up their books but you don’t want your money to support their causes? Why should an actor’s (or author’s) opinion count more than mine simply because they’re in the public eye? Why is it all my liberal friends are so rabid they jump on every ALLEGEDLY wrongheaded thing the conservative candidates have ALLEGEDLY done? SUPPOSED liberal bias in education? AND the media? Oh, yeah. It isn’t supposed or alleged. It’s there. Why does one party get away with being sexist when the other is accountable?

I hate when this posts before I was ready. Grrrr.  Though I suppose that’s the Universes’s way of saying I should shut up now. By the way? I’m a Centrist. I vote for the candidate, not the party.

I didn’t say authors and actors can’t talk about politics, I said I don’t care what their opinions on those things are. I don’t actually need to know what anyone else’s opinions on political issues are (save, of course, those actually running for office, because I’m very interested in what they have to say. There are a few pundits/analysts on both sides of the fence whose thoughts usually interest, amuse, or enlighten me, and I’ll sometimes read them to get a fuller understanding of the issue from both of those sides before I make up my mind). Actors are free to discuss politics anywhere they like. That doesn’t mean I have to care what they say, or that I am required to listen.

Actors are famous because they are very good at acting. So if I am interested in that topic, I will happily seek them out and listen to whatever they have to say on the subject; it is one in which they have proven expertise, so their thoughts on it have value to me. Their thoughts on politics, an area in which they have to my knowledge no proven expertise, do not. I don’t see a need to apologize for that; I’m not interested in Otis the barber’s political opinions either, and if he keeps talking about them while cutting my hair I’ll stop going to him for haircuts. Nor do I care if the girl checking out my groceries wants me to vote for Obama or McCain, or what my children’s teachers think, unless an issue comes up which specifically relates to teaching, grocery checking, or barbering. If that were the case, I would happily ask them for their input.

I feel perfectly comfortable expressing my thoughts on writing, and what makes good or bad writing. It’s something I know a little bit about. I don’t presume to think my readers want to know my thoughts on the big issues; I’m a writer. I write genre fiction. I love genre fiction, but I don’t think having even small success at writing it means people care what I think about the election, and I think it would be presumptuous of me to start talking/blogging about it incessantly as if my thoughts and opinions mean anything to them at all. Yes, by virtue of being a US citizen I am qualified to discuss politics; I have the right to. I discuss politics with my husband, and with my friends. But I don’t think the general public should be forced to hear what I have to think, when I am no better or worse, no better or worse informed, than they are. They come to my blog to read about my books, and my thoughts on publishing, and sometimes funny stories about my kids or my clumsiness or whatever. My job is to entertain them, and that is what I try to do. Suddenly getting political feels like a bait-and-switch.

And as far as those opinions being shoved down my throat, I can’t help but feel when I go to someone’s blog and it’s full of invective and shouting and “Only a moron would believe this guy”, it certainly feels like I’m choking on something.

And therein lies the problem for writers, especially women. Say what you like, but if we don’t like how you say it, then we’ll punish you for it. Funny how no one ever grandly tells John Scalzi they won’t ever read his books again because of his opinions.

I’m another person who won’t buy a writer’s books if I don’t like the writer. I might get the books out of the library, but I won’t purchase them.

And in fact, hilariously enough, John Scalzi IS one of the writers whose works I won’t buy!!! In that Bedlam-ish brouhaha over the Open Source Boob Project, Scalzi had a couple of really unfortunate posts about the whole thing, and it turned me off so bad that I’ve never bothered to read his stuff since, let alone pay for it.

It goes both ways, I guess. I won’t chide the author for having opinions. Don’t chide me for refusing to buy that author’s works. There’s no law that says I have to.

I don’t think it’s a matter of telling authors what they can and can’t talk about. Or actors or musicians or any other entertainer. JMHO is that much of the public see us as entertainers and that’s what they need from us—entertainment. Not something they can see on television, read in a newspaper, listen to on the radio, read on the internet, read in books.

I’m fine with people expressing their opinions. Barry Eisler is an author with very strong political views and he blogs about them regularly. I like how he does it. First of all he makes a statement about what he blogs about and then he rationally discusses the topic like last night’s VP debate. http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=73911562

I think that’s key, too—if an author does want to discuss their opinions, do it rationally and professionally. As in not “J. Jones is such a fhead” but “I strongly disagree with J. Jones on X topic.” Or whatever.

Sure, flip out, be angry, shout your opinion—but think about your audience and what they are there to hear. Barry does a great job of it. A little snippet from his blog intro:

This blog aims to be a haven from fulmination, disrespect, polemics, and other attack-style debate.

Barry is a NYT thriller novelist (former CIA and lawyer) and has a movie from his assassin series coming out in 2009 starring Gary Oldman.

Yes, he’s an author stating his political views. But he’s also not in the business of HEA like we romance authors are. I’ve been on a panel with Barry and he thought *he* had a lot of sex in his novels. We romance writers had him blushing.  (Just a sidebar—he’s damned cute and nice on top of that.)

I SO believe in freedom of speech and anyone expressing their opinion. I just feel that in romance, a lot of readers need a haven, someplace they can enjoy themselves, get a laugh, find out something interesting about the author or her/his books. Romance is about HEAs. Arguing about religion and politics—some people like to argue. Some like to discuss. Some like to listen. Some would rather be some place else where they have a “safe place,” so to speak. And can just have fun and not have more negativity shoved in their faces.

On the general subject of political opinions, anyone who is not yet familiar with this site
http://www.politicalcompass.org/
ought to have a look, do the test, and look at some of the other material.  Interesting, enlightening,often surprising, especially in terms of national and international perceptions.

whereas it’s ok for actors to embrace activism, for authors of commercial fiction, it’s not ok at all.

Ummm….says who?  The media??  ‘Nuff said.

Oh, and just as an afterthought, perhaps it feels shoved down my throat because it seems very few people discuss anything but politics these days, or at least, people have no compunction about discussing politics with strangers. I grow increasingly weary of meeting new people and having them make political jokes or comments within the first few minutes of our acquaintance, and going on and on about their particular viewpoint. Since odds are I disagree with them at least half the time, I’m forced to either smile weakly and change the subject, or disagree and face an argument. It’s rude, and priggish, and I really wish people would stop doing it.

I’m all politic’d out, frankly.

Before this election, I avoided talking politics on my blog. I didn’t want to alienate readers or potential readers who disagreed with my political views, so I just kept my thoughts to myself.

But this election is too damn important for me to remain silent.

So yes, on my blog, I’ve been blogging about certain candidates and my impressions, all the while linking to sources to back up my statements. And I’ve gotten accounts at political blogs and have started commenting there as well. Regarding the economy, which is such a key issue in this election, I’m encouraging people to go out and read, read, read the numerous blogs dedicated to explaining what these otherwise overwhelming things actually mean, and then come to their own conclusions. We can’t make informed decisions, let alone have informed opinions, unless we understand the argument from all sides.

I realize that blogging about my reaction to specific candidates may alienate some readers, and may even have the net result of me losing readers. That’s a risk I’m willing to take.

That being said, I won’t discuss politics on other people’s blogs (except, cough, when asked for my opinion about authors discussing politics).

I SO believe in freedom of speech and anyone expressing their opinion.

I am as well.  What I am against is “celebrities” who state their opinion and IF/WHEN their “fans” voice their dissent, said “celebrities” get totally bent out of shape and bemoan the fact that they’re not entitled to their opinion.  @@

If there is one thing I learned in the military is I think that authors are probably very correct not to talk about three things that I won’t talk about in a professional environment either.

Sex

Politics

Religion

If anything I think we know waaaaay too much about other peoples opinions about these things in the wrong places.

I think making a revealing comment on any of these topics in maybe a blog devoted to talking about those subjects is one thing but presenting it on a professional blog devoted to your books and your livelihood is another.

Your opinion does matter in my view but in the appropriate context not at the office.

I grow increasingly weary of meeting new people and having them make political jokes or comments within the first few minutes of our acquaintance, and going on and on about their particular viewpoint.

  My mom and dad told me early and often, NEVER discuss politics and/or religion with anyone!  Easiest/quickest way to lose friends and make enemies.

Of course, Jon Stewart, well…he’s a totally different story…..

I’m with you, Lori! And Colbert right along with Stewart.

I’m all politic’d out, frankly.

December, I’m right there with you at this point. Is it time for the election yet so we can express our opinions at the polls? I wish. One more month . . . We need to get our butts out there and VOTE, VOTE, VOTE!

Writers, like actors, singers and others in the public eye, are CITIZENS, and are entitled to express their opinion.  However, as Natalie Maines and The Dixie Chicks found out, sometimes expressing those opinions has consequences.  The Dixie Chicks received death threats, their children were physically threatened, and they were certainly hit in the pocketbook when people didn’t agree with their statements.  On the other hand, some of us DID agree with their statements, appreciated their guts in speaking up, and actually bought their records when we otherwise might not have.  This cuts both ways.   

Ultimately it’s up to each citizen, artist or not, to decide which consequences they’ll accept, what they’ll risk, by speaking their opinions or beliefs aloud.  These opinions might lead me to some conclusions about a writer’s personal worldview that I might not agree with, but if the writing’s good, the writing’s good.

I don’t mind the author talking politics, in fact I encourage everyone to talk politics! The more people talk politics the more informed everyone is (if nothing else, they research to present a rebuttal to their opponents)

However, here’s my hypocrite card - though I encourage authors (and everyone) to talk politics, I desperately avoid reading the views of ANY author I love. Whether it’s on politics or anything else for that matter. I hate it when i love a series of books then I read something the author has said and it make me cringe or enrages me. If it’s really bad it would colour the books for me and I’d never be able to read them the same way again

Lori asked:

Out of curiosity then: if a writer you really loved and bought the moment the books were released blogged that she always gave 15% of all monies she earned to political movements againstabortion/anti gay marriage/fill in your own hot button issue are you still going to buy her books?

Nope.  I’d take her books out of the library if I wanted to read them, but I wouldn’t give my money to causes I actively oppose.  (Which is why I don’t belong to Curves.)  Now, obviously, people give money to all kinds of things, and usually we don’t know what they are.  But if an author takes a stance that she’s going to promote those causes—which is what she’d be doing making a statement like that on her blog—that’s different from giving to them privately.

Naturally, a writer with considerable commercial success already has less to worry about than one who’s on the beginning of their career.  One with multiply bestsellers is less likely to suffer the consequences of, for example, putting a “donate to defeat California’s Proposition 8” button on her website than is an author with a shorter history.

I tend to think authors should keep ranting politics off their blogs, or put them in a separate section so that those who are interested in seeing that side of an author can do so, but those who are not don’t have to.  If you feel strongly about something, you do want the freedom to express that, but it doesn’t have to be on the front page where people who come for a little escapism have to deal with it.  Perhaps an internal page called “political ramblings” or something, so that people who want to know what feel can find out.

One thing that’s notable here—authors fall into one distinct political persuasion most of the time (as long as we mean American party politics).  You’ll see it in your comments here, too.  I’d be interested to see if the readership splits down similar lines.  Or if the political beliefs of readers are related in any way to the kinds of books they read or subgenres of romance.  Obviously, paranormal romance, for example, won’t appeal to someone with a hardline Christian conservative voter, but I wonder if there are other differences that make it more or less dangerous to talk about your beliefs because it is more or less likely to alienate your audience.

I sometimes express political opinions in my professional blog, but I usually keep them confined to my personal blog.  People who know me know how I feel.

I did post a link at my Darlene Marshall Facebook fan page to “SayNo2”.  I don’t think mean spirited amendments that penalize adults—gay and straight—for who they love belong in our Florida state constitution.

Sarah, I honestly wish I knew less about my politicians on these subjects too.

Nothing floored me more than McCain and Obama talking at a Pastor’s Forum in Southern California like it was a debate.

I thought church and state was supposed to be kept separate? Why do I get a bad feeling that we are turning into a theocracy? I don’t want a Religious Right or a Religious Left.

I want “answers to hard questions” in plain language from both candidates but I guess that’s like this Bailout Bill a bunch of high dollar promotion and pork without much actual realistic solutions.

From Forbes.com

In fact, some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy.

“It’s not based on any particular data point,” a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. “We just wanted to choose a really large number.

I think this intimacy thing is more about wanting to feel like best buddies and professionally I think that is not appropriate and fake.

Sarah, I honestly wish I knew less about my politicians on these subjects too.

Nothing floored me more than McCain and Obama talking at a Pastor’s Forum in Southern California like it was a debate.

I thought church and state was supposed to be kept separate? Why do I get a bad feeling that we are turning into a theocracy? I don’t want a Religious Right or a Religious Left.

I want “answers to hard questions” in plain language from both candidates but I guess that’s like this Bailout Bill a bunch of high dollar promotion and pork without much actual realistic solutions.

From Forbes.com

In fact, some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy.

“It’s not based on any particular data point,” a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. “We just wanted to choose a really large number.

I think this intimacy thing is more about this misguided need of wanting to relate to an author and professionally I think that is a mine field. I am not saying “Don’t be nice” or “Don’t be supportive” or “Don’t be yourself” I am just about keeping an appropriate distance. Especially on the internet.

Sarah, I honestly wish I knew less about my politicians on these subjects too.

Nothing floored me more than McCain and Obama talking at a Pastor’s Forum in Southern California like it was a debate.

I thought church and state was supposed to be kept separate? Why do I get a bad feeling that we are turning into a theocracy? I don’t want a Religious Right or a Religious Left.

I want “answers to hard questions in plain language” from both candidates but I guess that’s like this Bailout Bill a bunch of high dollar promotion and pork without much actual realistic solutions.

From Forbes.com

In fact, some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy.

“It’s not based on any particular data point,” a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. “We just wanted to choose a really large number.

I think this intimacy thing is more about this misguided need of wanting to relate to an author and professionally I think that is a mine field. I am not saying “Don’t be nice” or “Don’t be supportive” or “Don’t be yourself” I am just about keeping and maintaining a certain distance of respect. Especially on the internet.

I am a little conflicted here.  On the one hand, I absolutely believe that all people should follow politics and vote.  On the other hand, it irritates me when people want to vote for McCain.  There, I said it.  I haven’t run into any authors who mentioned this fact, but it would irritate me, and I am not sure I could read the books without remembering the fact.  I read a enewletter from an author who mentioned her strong Christian beliefs that led her to believe (small minded, bigoted thing) and that ruined the likelyhood that I can read her books without throwing them against the wall.

I feel the same way about religion.  I am an atheist, and I tend to assume most people in the US, romance writers included, are some form of Christian because statistically, that’s probably what they check off on the census.  However, Jesus talk on your blog makes it unlikely I am going to come back. 

Out of curiosity then: if a writer you really loved and bought the moment the books were released blogged that she always gave 15% of all monies she earned to political movements againstabortion/anti gay marriage/fill in your own hot button issue are you still going to buy her books?

I wouldn’t.  This wouldn’t be terribly difficult for me, as I don’t buy that many books brand new- and the only way the author could donate that 15% was if I bought the book brand new.  It would disappoint me if, say, SEP’s secret baby fetish was the result of a loathing of abortion.  I can’t say I would burn my signed copy of It Had to be You, but rereading it, I would probably be a little soured, and notice more things that bugged me and judge it harshly. 

Laura Vivanco- absolutely agree.  Romance novels are very political in ways we don’t necessarily pay attention to.  I have a difficult time reading about heros or heroines in the military, but I might be the only one, given how many books there are.  The fact that there are so few gay characters says something about the world these characters inhabit, or the lack of bisexuals, or interracial couples.  I can’t think of a single bisexual in a romance novel (evil killers excepted, Cheryl Holt).  The way that no one ever says, hey, the condom broke, let’s go get Plan B.  The apparent lack of buses.  Its really irritating.

I think I prefer a separation. When I am “novelist” I am creator of my own mental backyard where I let others come and play. It is a secret identity I put on to be in my happy place. In my own backyard I am benevolent dictator and queen of all I survey.

In politics I am just another voter. If I am writing about politics for purposes of publication, I am writing non-fiction; that is a whole different gig. As in GHOSTBUSTERS I wouldn’t cross the streams.

Using celebrity in one to try to substantiate the other strikes me as weak minded and sloppy. It would be like saying, “I am a pharmacist so I am also a good cook” that goes right back to your symbolic logic from yesterday’s discussion. It just doesn’t pan out.

If you want to talk about politics, join a political chat or blog or twitter or whatever. If you want to PURSUE politics, make a MySpace for that. A link between them would be fine. If a reader pursues my political mumblings through a link and gets offended, he asked for it.

One final (incendiary) thought. If you think there is no difference as a writer between writing good fiction and good non-fiction, you have another think coming.

Good non-fiction requires an extreme mental and verbal clarity that is its own gift; creating a realistic, believable fictional world whether it is Victorian London or the Dreadful Planet Snookums is a different one. (Not mutually exclusive)

I actually don’t care one way or another if the authors express their political opinions outside of their books.  I mean, if you’re just reading a person’s working for the sheer entertainment value and a happily-ever-after, why are you even paying attention to what they say in a blog or anywhere else? If that’s all you’re looking for from the authors, just put an alert on amazon.com or some other similar site so you know when they have a new book coming out and go along your merry way. There’s nothing saying that you actually have to pay attention or read about what an author’s doing or supporting in their personal life.  It’s the same with actors - I know this might be a shock to some people, but ALL TVs have an off button. If you don’t want to hear it, you don’t have to listen to it. I do feel they should be calm and rational about it rather than insulting, but I believe that of EVERYBODY, no matter what line of business you may be in.  People are more likely to listen to and respect your opinion if you state your opinion in a logical manner, even if they don’t agree with you.

As for having it in the books… Well, I’m a political science major in college right now. I love politics. I see it as a way of life - it affects EVERYTHING in our world. Most people don’t see it but it does, in everything from what we are legally able to do down to the price of our groceries. Because it’s a topic I enjoy, I’m honestly more likely to purchase a book if it has a bit of politics in it.  My ideal happily-ever-after includes a behind-the-scenes political career and success for my personal causes. It thrills me to death when I actually find it or something similar in a book. I realize this is my personal preference, but that’s the great thing about books - if you don’t like the topics addressed in one, you don’t have to buy it. There are PLENTY of options out there at the bookstores.

Out of curiosity then: if a writer you really loved and bought the moment the books were released blogged that she always gave 15% of all monies she earned to political movements againstabortion/anti gay marriage/fill in your own hot button issue are you still going to buy her books?

Just for the record, 100% of all the monies I earn on books goes directly to shoes.

Say what you like, but if we don’t like how you say it, then we’ll punish you for it.

So it’s ok for someone to say what they like, but I can’t express my disagreement by withholding my financial support? That sounds somewhat uneven. If someone expresses an opinion in a manner that makes me think less of them, what is so wrong about choosing not to support them? For me it’s not about punishment, I don’t expect someone to change who they are or what they think because I stop buying their book, but it is about not helping fund someone who I dislike. It’s my money, I should be able to decide who I want to give it to and why.

Personally, I think celebs/authors have as much right to their opinion as anyone else. And I reserve the right to dislike them and/or their opinion just as I would anyone else on the street. True, I don’t effect most people’s income when I choose to disassociate myself from them, but then most people I meet don’t make their money from me.

I try not to buy products from companies who’s practices I disagree with, why should an author’s product be any different?

Honestly, though? I don’t pay much attention to an author’s political, religious, or sexual preferences. It’s not really my business. It would only really effect me if they they were using the proceeds of books to fund something I disagree strongly with, because then it’s kind of like I’m supporting that cause when I wouldn’t want to.

Everybody has an opinion about politics.  That is just life. And no one should be punished because he/she isn’t in agreement with someone else.

Just so y’all know I am usually die hard republican.

However, this race is one that is hard to choose.  Both candidates are worth their weight in gold.  It has been a long time since we saw truly good candidates (not whiners and puppets; how I viewed our last election) and sometimes we need someone else’s negative and positive viewpoints so that we don’t miss things.  Constructive criticism is a GOOD thing!

The only time I get upset (not angry) with an opinion is when A) it is being shoved down my throat big time or B) someone doesn’t have all the facts and refuses to quit attempting to shove something at me when it may be not the whole truth. Notice I say whole because political statements always have some truth.

As to writers being punished?  I will continue to buy books from any author I like until their writing style turns into something I don’t. (Not naming names; have had a couple authors who took a left turn and left me behind because I didn’t like where they were going.  None of those were political changes). And honestly, politics adds a whole new dimension for some books that can make it even more interesting.

To the teacher further up, though we appear to stand on opposite sides of the fence here, I am truly sorry to hear that you have to suppress your political feelings at your job.  A university should be more open in my opinion.  Everyone needs to be heard regardless of his/her stance

Respect for a diversity of opinion should be a hallmark of political discourse.  In my opinion that is where a disconnect often occurs.  I love interacting with people that see things differently from me….as long as they don’t demean me in the process.  Sadly, when discussions turn to politics or religion, many individuals exhibit alarming intolerance for people who strongly disagree with their point of view.  Frankly, no one segment of society has cornered the marked on intelligence or rational thought.

Hmmm… I try to remember to subscribe to Voltaire’s view on democracy, but in our society it seems to have been forgotten by supporters of both sides. Whatever happened to

I may disagree with what you say, but would defend unto my death your right to say it

(or write, depending on which translation we are dealing with)?

I am fine with other points of view. I may debate them but I try to remain respectful. Polarization is one of the downsides of a two party (as opposed to multi-party) system. But I cannot respect the hate that seems to spew from some (on both sides) when their stance is questioned… if we did not have someone to take the opposing stance, then it would not be a democracy would it?

Considering this involves both books and politics (and recent discussions here), an on topic debate could be banned books, and the firing of Librarians who oppose censorship.

However, here’s my hypocrite card - though I encourage authors (and everyone) to talk politics, I desperately avoid reading the views of ANY author I love. Whether it’s on politics or anything else for that matter. I hate it when i love a series of books then I read something the author has said and it make me cringe or enrages me. If it’s really bad it would colour the books for me and I’d never be able to read them the same way again

I have to say that I agree.  I don’t really frequent the personal boards and blogs of authors, in general.  It’s not a conscious decision, because I have gone to a few author blogs.  However, I find that I don’t tend to frequent them regularly, if ever, after the initial visit.  Conversely, I stop by SBTB several times a day.  Thinking about it, I think it’s because I simply don’t want to know.  If I love someone’s work, I don’t want to know that they are voting for McCain or think Palin is just the bestest thing ever.  I don’t want to know if they are stridently vegan or donate 50% of their earnings to PETA.  I don’t want to know if they think that the earth is flat or that dinosaur bones are God’s way of testing your faith because the earth is only 5000-6000 years old.  I don’t want to know if they are planning a visit to my lovely state just so they can finally take in the wonder that is The Creation Museum (The must-see vacation spot for people who think that The Flintstones was a documentary, apparently.) 

On the whole, I don’t really think it’s my business what the author, as a person, thinks or believes or enjoys.  I’m pretty much the same way about actors and singers, too.  (Though, admittedly, it’s a lot harder to not hear far more than I want to about some celebrities and, sadly, in some cases, I really have a hard time separating the actor as a character versus the actor as a person when I see them in a movie or tv show because of it.)  That said, I whole-heartedly endorse an author’s right to think or believe whatever he/she chooses and to talk about it and blog about it and if I come across it in the message boards I frequently, I’m fine with it.  I just don’t go out of my way to seek out these opinions because I just want to enjoy their work without having anything color my enjoyment, good or bad.

I think what bothers me most about politics in general and the presidential election in specific is that it sometimes seems like the greatest proportion of the general populace completely slept through their government classes in high school.  People act like every single thing that comes out of our federal government, good or bad, is absolutely and incontrovertibly the president’s fault (or triumph, whichever.) Sometimes, it’s like the Senate and Congress don’t even exist! And, granted, the president is responsible for a fair proportion of legislation, but not All Of It. Quite a bit comes out of the other branches, and they don’t all make decisions based on party lines. I understand that the president is a figurehead for the government as a whole, but I feel that there’s not enough emphasis placed on the rest of the system—maybe it’s because this is the only election in which both myself (in Washington) and my three closest friends (in Pennsylvania, South Dakota, and Tennessee) all have the exact same candidates?

I’ve also noticed a tendency among my acquaintance to vote by party, No Matter What, even when they disagree with the actual candidate on most major issues. I think that is where a lot of arguments happen among friends; when one feels that the other is acting hypocritically, and is trying to understand their position. Unfortunately, dogmatic individuals don’t operate under normal rules of logic, and get defensive when someone points out that they’re being…well, dogmatic.

The only time a writer expressing an opinion on a controversial topic will ever offend me enough to stop buying his or her work is if he/she implies that I’m in any way inferior because I don’t hold that same opinion. I respect everyone’s right to think and believe as they will as well as their right to express those beliefs. It’s one of the attributes that I think makes America…well, America. But I expect to respected in turn, and only those who are so egocentric as to believe otherwise will turn me away from anything having to do with them. I’m more likely to lose respect for a person - writers or anyone - based on their attitude towards other’s differing opinions and how they express their own beliefs rather than the beliefs themselves.

Too, as I expressed on my blog this morning, I think writers, as people with the special ability to express themselves eloquently, do a service to other writers when they express their opinions in well thought-out ways. By showing us viewpoints that differ from our own, other writers can help us break away from our own thinking to create characters that differ from us when the knee-jerk is to default back to our own beliefs when creating characters from scratch.

I hate that two people with different political viewpoints keep quiet when around one another because they might…disagree. Argue. Debate. Oh, shit, dialogue. That’s just terrible. Can’t have that. Holy crap.

I think this is indicative of Americans’ desire to be nice and liked.  Politics is far more openly discussed in other countries. 

Would I buy an author’s work if I disagreed with their politics?  I think it depends on what the issue is.  I find homophobic/ racist/ elitist authors hard to read, but wouldn’t avoid the works of someone who is a fiscal conservative or libertarian.  I don’t tell others how to live and expect others to respect my privacy as well.

My mom and dad told me early and often, NEVER discuss politics and/or religion with anyone! Easiest/quickest way to lose friends and make enemies.

My parents so didn’t subscribe to that rule. I’ll discuss politics and religion with anyone who wants to discuss. This doesn’t mean I’m going to start a discussion with strangers on the street (if I’m somewhere reading watching something about politics and someone comments on what we’re watching I won’t tell them to shut up, but I like getting into such discussions with people I don’t know) but if I’m in a group of people and the topics come up I’m not going to tune out or keep my opinions to myself.

And, somehow, I’ve yet to lose friends because I don’t believe in religion and they all do or because they’re all Republicans and I’m not. But this is probably because I’m sane and can respect their views even if I disagree with them and vice versa.

Ultimately I think it’s just a matter of what you enjoy. A lot of people don’t like or want to discuss politics and so when it’s election time and that’s the topic of the day it becomes obnoxious and people just don’t want to see the word politics anymore. I am not one of those people so I say let every one talk about politics if they want to and I’ll pick what I want to read and what I don’t.

I struggled with this myself, but I finally plunged in because this race is so important to me and I needed an outlet.

I’ve stated clearly on my political posts that opposing views are welcome and encouraged but there will be no flaming of any kind… I’ve had one anonymous post who disagreed with me but wasn’t ugly or inflammatory.

My biggest message overall has been to get out and vote, although I did jump in and explain why I’m voting Obama. And then my Obama yard sign was vandalized so I had to blog about that. Also, i went to oxford for the debate and I blogged about that with pictures.

I am of the mind that it’s okay if you disagree with my politics. I respect you if you’ll respect me. I’m not going to stop buying someone’s books because they’re voting for McCain. I would hope the fact that I’m an Obama girl wouldn’t stop someone from buying my books.

Tina C. said: 

I don’t really frequent the personal boards and blogs of authors, in general. ]

I don’t either.  Authors whose work I enjoy AND who write or blog about craft or the business of writing might get a hit or two from me, but otherwise…  (shrugs). 

I guess it’s about boundaries.  As a reader, I don’t expect an author to be my friend.  I don’t have to feel I have a up-close-and-personal relationship with a writer, or have deep insight into their personal life, to appreciate their work.

Political views are a matter of that person’s opinion. My own family has very diverse political views. I’m not going to stop loving my brothers because they believe and vote opposite of me. I’m going to go out and vote and cancel out one of them’s vote. Would I buy an author if they voted different than me on candidates or issues? I absolutely would. My requirement from an author is to tell a story that I can relate to. Do that and I’ll happily support you until the writing doesn’t appeal to me anymore.  And in fact I do heartily support the right to arm bears. :-)

I don’t really frequent the personal boards and blogs of authors, in general.

Me neither. I’ve been on a bunch of authors’ blogs whose writing I loved loved loved and then over the course of reading the blog became very… disenchanted? I dunno. Blogging is a very strange animal. People’s personalities and characters are betrayed. It’s kind of weird. I often would end up reading a writer’s blog and going, “Holy crap, I wish I hadn’t read that” and then kind of frantically click on the X at the corner of the web page.

I’ve learned my lesson. There are a handful of writers/other public people whose blogs do not end up making me think I’ve just caught them naked and scratching themselves in the kitchen. That handful of blogs I will read. The rest, I avoid like the plague.

(Amusingly, I wonder how much posts like this reveal my e-dentity, such as it is, naked and scratching myself in the kitchen, for all the world to see. LOL…)

Not totally related to the issue, but I stopped watching Mel Gibson’s movies after The Passion of the Christ and his drunken tirade after being arrested. He actually makes me physically ill when I watch him on TV and he used to be my favorite pretty faced actor. The point that I’m trying to make here is that if an author/musician/performer expresses an opinion that is radically against what I believe to be right, I just can’t enjoy their work anymore.
Political/sexual/religious preferences different to mine? As long as they are respectful to others, I don’t mind at all.

I think it’s a personal choice for any author—or person—to make whether or not to discuss politics or not.  For me, I do, but my family also talked politics.  People are going to like you or not based on your books, and if they chose not to like you because you support one candidate over another, then that’s their choice. As to me, it’s a matter of retaining my rights as a woman, having equality for all people, and other issues I am deeply concerned about—-I support Obama all the way.  If people chose to not like me or read my prospective books because of that . . . well, so be it.

I find AgTigress’ words really fascinating from a non-American perspective:

But try criticising either side of the American political spectrum (a somewhat limited spectrum that runs all the way from, umm, indigo to violet, since all American political positions are way to the right of centre), and they will all jump on you and sweepingly accuse you of being anti-American…

What’s interesting to me is that a) she’s right in a way because I was immediately a bit offended by that post, and b) it illustrates that a lot of American views are obviously not getting out to a worldwide audience.

I honestly don’t think it’s true that all American political positions are way to the right of center. I think those to the left have fallen into the trap of pandering to the right in speechifying, but I do think there are some pretty strong left-leaners out there in office and a LOT of strong left-leaners in the populace in general. AgTigress, there are a lot of us who are quite liberal indeed.

As far as authors posting their own views, I think an author should feel free to express herself or himself however they want. But realizing that standing up and expressing a strong viewpoint may indeed have some backlash. I’m sure all of us have certain hot-button issues that are polarizing for us. But for the most part, unless that political view is also jammed down my throat in the writings of that author, I can let it go.

Real world example, I almost didn’t read past Karen Traviss’ City of Pearl because it was so vegan/animal rights oriented and that’s a hot-button issue for me (I’m very pro animal welfare, anti animal rights). I decided the books were worth it and let it go, but it was a struggle.

What’s the fallout if an author you like takes a political stand that you don’t like, and really, does it matter?

Depends on the definition of “matter.” Will it change my book reading/buying habits? Not necessarily. Recently I read a science fiction series I liked and found out later that the author was a very conservative person. I’d still like to own the series. However, will it make me unhappy that someone who otherwise seems so very intelligent really isn’t? Yes, it will. And if that person also invests in political campaigns that, e.g., work to keep gay people from having the right to visit their sick partners in the hospital, then damn straight I won’t buy their books directly from the bookstore. I’ll try to get them used or in some other way that won’t enrich their anti-gay (or whatever) activities. Conversely, while I admire Suzanne Brockman’s support of gay rights, I find her books disappointing and will not buy them to support her correct view of this issue.

I guess it’s about boundaries.  As a reader, I don’t expect an author to be my friend.  I don’t have to feel I have a up-close-and-personal relationship with a writer, or have deep insight into their personal life, to appreciate their work.

The big thing for me is that a writers friendship should not be expected for buying their books. Maybe it is old fashion these days but that is why I love professional etiquette.

Not announcing your every opinion about Sex Politics or Religion while presenting your work allows me to appreciate and respect your work.

Just like when I review a book I make an absolute effort to separate the writer from the work I also like to see an author separate the author persona (Pen Name) from her private life.

When I see people mixing these things up I think it is a very bad idea on very shaky ground.

I’d been typing out this really long post about how I am not bothered by the politics of the authors I read, that as long as their views are expressed intelligently, I will continue to read their books. Living where I do (red state) and participating in a certain sport (trapshooting), I cannot shun people because of their politics as that would leave me with no friends at all.

Then I bumped into this thought:

What if, in a world spun off its axis, Suzanne Brockmann’s books were unequivocally anti-gay and she donated the proceeds from a book like All Through the Night to anti-gay causes?

Without hesitation, I can say that would be the end, for me, of my reader-author relationship with her. I can’t even think of a scenario in which I could continue to read her books because that (hypothetical and completely impossible) stance would offend me forever.

Clearly, I’m not who I thought I was.

I agree with everything SB Sarah said above. My original intention was to reassure the authors who posted today that I would respect their politics if they chose to share them and would not take any disagreement I might have with them to the bookstore. I still believe that, but apparently only as long as said politics don’t cross specific boundaries in my own.

I feel like such a hypocrite.

I guess it’s about boundaries.  As a reader, I don’t expect an author to be my friend.  I don’t have to feel I have a up-close-and-personal relationship with a writer, or have deep insight into their personal life, to appreciate their work.

Yup.  If I’m visiting an author’s website or blog, it’s probably to find out what you are writing next, or to get info on your backlist or a series’ order, not to get your insight on the election.  But I don’t particularly care if you use your site for personal viewpoints.

I don’t hold authors to a different standard than I do actors, musicians, sports stars, the op-ed writers in my morning paper, the dude next door, or my ca-razy father in law.  If you write/say something intelligent and interesting, I might be interested in hearing/reading it, even if I don’t agree.  If you literally or figuratively screech in my ear, get hateful, reference unsubstantiated chain e-mails, ignore stuff that has already been proven/disproven, and don’t check your facts, I’m tuning you out.  And yes, my opinion of you in general may drop, and that might affect how much time I spend with you (and in an author’s case, your books).

Ditto Teddypig. I kind of feel like, having invited readers to my blog (which I have done, for all intents and purposes), I owe it to them to not start discussing subjects which may offend them or make them uncomfortable. My blog is part of my job; I wouldn’t walk into my boss’s office and start going on about my political views, so I don’t do it to readers either.

I get enough of that in my private life, where I’m fairly outspoken. But I would no sooner discuss politics with strangers than I would discuss my sex life with them.

Hi Ruth! I meant specifically that consumers would stop buying an author who held different political viewpoints - and expressed them. I am well aware of the asshat/consumer line. Trust me.

Ahh, got it. I should read more carefully.

No, I generally won’t dismiss someone’s work simply because they have different political viewpoints than I do.

I would not purchase the work of people who, like someone mentioned above, stated that they give 15% of their profits to a cause that I am morally opposed to.

I don’t quite understand why that seems to be a contentious issue. People seem to assume that “freedom of speech” actually means “freedom from all reprecussions.”  If I choose to vote with my $$, that’s just me exercising my freedom of speech. I don’t have an obligation to buy anything from anyone, but I’m getting the vibe from some people that refraining from a purchase is some kind of evil.

if a writer you really loved and bought the moment the books were released blogged that she always gave 15% of all monies she earned to political movements against abortion/anti gay marriage/fill in your own hot button issue are you still going to buy her books?

I’ve never stopped buying an author because of online asshattery or differing political opinions; as a reader, I’m interested in the work itself.  I’m not comfortable with the notion that we should consider whether to financially support a *person* with our reading, as if some don’t “deserve” to earn money.  People all “deserve” that much, and again, it has no bearing on my response to a book.

However, I do adjust my lifestyle and consumption to match my beliefs.  What authors do with their earnings is none of my business, but if an author puts ME in the position of actively supporting a specific cause that I disagree with, I won’t buy the book.

That’s the balance I’ve come to; it may look inconsistent and, well, it is.  I feel strongly about separating the work from the author, and about matching my lifestyle to my principles.  Compromise is the only way I can negotiate that combination.

try criticising either  side of the American political spectrum (a somewhat limited spectrum that runs all the way from, umm, indigo to violet, since all American political positions are way to the right of centre), and they will all jump on you and sweepingly accuse you of being anti-American…

AgTigress, I’d make the distinction that it’s this type of “sweeping” generalization that some of us tend to jump on, rather than the political discussion itself.  As I said on another topic here yesterday, I’m increasingly tired of American exceptionalism (from Americans and non-Americans) and of the monolithic views I see espoused about many nationalities (“Americans are”, “Italians are”, “Brits are”).  When any of that is introduced, in my experience there’s a good chance the conversation will become predictable and circular.  So yes, I will bat back when I see this type of statement, much harder than if you criticized *politics* rather than “all” Americans, Chinese, or whoever.

I also think the venue and style of the conversation makes an enormous difference to how we express our politics and interpret others’ politics.  For example, in these discussions I often stand up—passionately at times—for opinions I don’t share.  I’m fairly certain that that occasionally gives others a false impression of my politics.  I don’t mind that, unless it creates assumptions about where I’m coming from and makes conversation grind to a halt.

I dislike author political talk. Doesn’t make you feel like picking up an author’s book when they start calling your political views stupid or ridiculous or otherwise. I also sometimes dislike that other book blogs (including this one) delve into politics. I really just want to go to a book blog to read about books and the publishing industry. Not opinions on politics. If I want that, I will go directly to my preferred sources.

But I think authors going off on politics is a very very bad idea. The relationship between reader and author is a very personal one. So why drive a wedge between you and your audience?

Aside from agreeing with Laura Vivanco in that romance novels are a lot more political then meets the eye, I do something a little bit different in terms of authors’ views vs. book purchases.

Nowadays, I usually read the book I want to buy from the library unless it’s an author I’m sure will write an A+ book, so voicing their political standing doesn’t bother me.

Also, if I like a book, I like the book.  Authors may be doing something they love, but it doesn’t change the fact it is still a career.  I’m not going to ignore my co-workers just because I disagree with them or vice versa.  Heck, even my family members are in intense debate these days.  Just because an author may be overly conservative for my taste, or having their characters having 10+ babies running afoot rather than have their characters use birth control (such as those wonderfully available french letters), doesn’t mean I’m going to stop buying a book I enjoy by them.  Most of the time, it’s just a plot ploy to create those loooonnnnnggggg family related tales of that family. 

It’s more likely for me to stop buying a book with too many logical/common knowledge/typo errors.  Example, a wonderful author I love I just can’t read after she wrote that AB positive blood types can only get AB positive (there were many many MANY other inaccuracies, but this was the last straw).  Um…no.  Everyone and their grandmother knows that unless it’s negative, AB blood types are universal recipients.  I’m positive. I asked a doctor, two medical students, and 3 science teachers.

Ruth had mentioned that freedom of speech does not mean freedom of repercussions, which I think is an important point of the recent political situation. Everyone’s different.  That goes for ideas, political standings, as well as actions made because of disagreements.

If an author is brave enough to state their thoughts on highly controversial matters, then I applaud them, but it rarely changes my opinions of the books written.  There are times when I think certain authors are completely awesome people but I just cannot get into their books.  Well, I still love said author and I’ll hang out and buy them food, but no way am I buying that book.  Whereas, I do have a few authors whom I don’t quite care for due to their attitudes, but I still love their writings ergo, I buy certain books I like, but will probably avoid any sit-down situations with them.

Of course, being human, the authors I get along with and still love their books, well…I usually just auto buy. Hehe.

And as Nadia points out, authors are just people too.  They have every right to say what they want, but I would prefer to read eloquent and intellectual discussions rather than some angry rants (not that they don’t have the right to do so, I just don’t read them).

Besides, I feel as if that most forms of media in America are highly conservative.  Until you have the money, clout, or support to say “I disagree with ________,” there’s going to be people whom will disagree with their actions on top of harsh and rude words.

Just my two cents.

Sure it is up to each individual in a democracy to share their views or not, but I argue that to be a responsible member of society there has to be some level of interaction with politics and other people’s views. 
I feel that all people have a responsibility to talk in a respectful and well researched way about how politics affects their lives to those who they interact with regularly.  For example, as a queer woman it is my responsibility to speak up about how policies negatively affect me, and which politicians are actively trying to harm me further.  People who care about me should know when their vote is likely to do me direct harm.  Of course, they can then go out and vote however they feel is right, but they will do so with the knowledge of how their vote can have direct impact in the life of someone they personally know, not just an anonymous ‘them’. 
This same principal holds true not just for queer people, or minorities, or people with children in the public schools, or small business owners, or people with disabilities, or people in the military, or families who want to be able to control how many children they have and when, or people who love hunting, or people who can’t afford to pay rent while working full time for minimum wage, or, or, or.  Politics affects everyone in this country, in many many ways.
While I would be open to talking about how politics are personal with just about anyone on the street I am well aware that that is a personal choice.  I don’t think that we have a responsibility to talk to people we have just met and/or may never interact with regularly about the way politics affects our lives.  But, in an internet age it can be hard to determine who counts as someone you interact with regularly: I think it really just comes down to your own comfort levels.
I will say, however, that I feel that those with a wider sphere of people who theoretically feel they have some kind of relationship with them/care about them, those in the public eye however they came to be there,  have a GREATER responsibility to share how their lives are affected by a policy or politician.

AgTigress wrote that “all American political positions are way to the right of centre” and Robinjn replied that this

illustrates that a lot of American views are obviously not getting out to a worldwide audience.

I honestly don’t think it’s true that all American political positions are way to the right of center. I think those to the left have fallen into the trap of pandering to the right in speechifying, but I do think there are some pretty strong left-leaners out there in office and a LOT of strong left-leaners in the populace in general. AgTigress, there are a lot of us who are quite liberal indeed.

By strong left-leaners do you mean people who would consider themselves socialists? Like AgTigress, I’m from the UK, and it’s true that some “American views are obviously not getting out to a worldwide audience,” at least, not this particular member of the worldwide audience, since I hadn’t heard of the Democratic Socialists of America until I started Googling just now. I did have the impression that there were some anti-capitalists in the US because of the Seattle protests against the World Trade Organisation, but in general I don’t think I’ve come across much mention of this part of the spectrum of American political views in the media over here. I’d agree with AgTigress that by UK standards, and despite the Labour Party’s shift to the right, the Democrats and Republicans (as represented in the UK media, but also judging from what I’ve read on US blogs) both give the impression that they’re fairly right-wing, though I also have the impression that the Republican Party is further right than the Democratic Party.

However, Lynne Connolly, further up the thread, who is also from the UK, wrote that “We are watching open-mouthed, as the USA passes Socialist measures and moves further left.” I have to say that I don’t perceive anything that’s happened in recent days as “Socialist measures” or an indication of a move to the left. So clearly there isn’t a consensus among those of us from the UK posting to this thread.

RfP, the ‘spectrum’ comment was a bit of casual levity that I should probably have avoided, since anything remotely flippant tends to annoy somebody, or even everybody,  in a political context. 

It is true, however, that political choice in both the USA and the UK at the moment is very limited indeed:  there are no significant political parties in either country that are either economically left of centre or socially libertarian.  This is one of the reasons why many people in our societies don’t bother to vote:  they don’t see much to choose between the parties.  The scope and nature of the differences of ideology and policy that I remember between our Tory and Labour parties in the 1950s-1970s were substantial, but they have melted away completely.  The whole boiling of ‘em are what I would call Tories today.

On ‘sweeping statements’: to some degree, stereotypes are one of the ways in which we make sense of the world around us, by classifying things.  Intellectually, stereotypes should always be examined and questioned, but we cannot function if we encounter each new situation, each new person, as a completely new and unknown quantity that must be analysed from first principles.  We apply our inbuilt classificatory framework, which is based on ‘received knowledge’ and personal experience, and then, rather than leaving it at that, we should test the new thing, person or experience against that information, because our expectations might be completely mistaken.  But there is nothing wrong in having expectations which may be based on stereotypes.  What is wrong is to cling to those perceptions even when evidence shows that they are false.

Sorry, Sarah,

I have to agree with Teddy Pig on this one. While there are no absolutes, and as much as I hate to say this, the publicist inside me is screaming Holy WTFBBQ! What are you doing?!?!? whenever a client wants to spout off about any of the three: sex politics or religion.  (And by sex in romancelandia, we’re not talking bout the act itself that might get people bent out of shape, but sexual preference that’s the hot button.) 

Do I think people should be able to voice their opinions? The writer in me says hell yes, it’s a fundamental right and if you don’t like what I have to say, don’t listen. The publicist shrieks and goes into a foaming fit thinking, what the hell did I spend all the time teaching you about message points and how to stay on them if you are just going to get sucked into a debate you can’t win and blow your entire image?

Here’s why (and it impacts author brands and how to know when you should have more than one name to write under).  There are some basic belief patterns that people aren’t going to be swayed about and get testy if you mess with them - they are, you guessed it, sex, politics and religion.  It doesn’t matter what you say, if they agree or disagree, pretty much you can be assured that it’s going to fuck you over when you get into a debate about any of these hot button topics.  And unfortunately, people do vote with their wallets.  If they don’t like what you have to say, and somebody somewhere won’t guaranteed, you are messing with your paycheck. 

Is it right?  No.  Is it the way things are?  Yes.  It’s the exact same reason why a publisher will ask an erotica writer to use a different pen name for her Christian Young Adult books.  The image people have of you is directly impacted by what you are associated with.

It would be like Coca-Cola saying they support a particular political candidate.  Now seriously politics doesn’t have anything to do with how the soda tastes, where you can buy it and if you enjoy it, but can you imagine the number of people that would stop buying Coca-Cola because of that simple annoucement?

Same thing.  Twisted.  But there you go.

So TeddyPig, right on.  If you are in your “author suit” really, I don’t think you want to splotch it up with discussing hot button topics unless you’re on a television or radio show where you know they are going to do that to you in an interview ahead of time, then controversy is golden. (See, even in this there are no absolutes.)

spaminator: seems13 (it does seem a bit teenagerist, don’t you think?)

I have to say that I don’t perceive anything that’s happened in recent days as “Socialist measures” or an indication of a move to the left.

No, of course they are not ‘socialist measures’!  There is not a smidgen of true socialist thinking involved.

:-)

Recently I read a science fiction series I liked and found out later that the author was a very conservative person. I’d still like to own the series. However, will it make me unhappy that someone who otherwise seems so very intelligent really isn’t? Yes, it will.

I think it judicious to avoid stereotyping.  I’m not sure being conservative equates to a lack of intelligence.  Bigotry exists (trust me on this) across the board.  If you’re a woman in this country who doesn’t subscribe to a certain set of beliefs you are subjected to numerous (unkind) labels.  People can share a gender without sharing a single brain.  Opposing views do not make you less intelligent, less of a woman, a religious zealot, or the product of a male dominated society.

The relationship between reader and author is a very personal one.

Is it?  Does it have to be?  When did this expectation arise, and who established this expectation?  I think this plays into what Sarah referred to in this quote: 

Used to be the book was the item of sale. Now authors are called upon over and over to represent themselves, their books, their backlist, and their lives/lifestyle/personal style/apartment backdrop/family life are part of the marketing package. Having the authors as representative of the book is, I believe, a relatively recent phenomenon and it makes a lot of people ponderous and uncomfortable.

As an aspiring author, I find this erosion of professional and personal boundaries to be uncomfortable indeed.  To me, the book is still the item of sale.  My perspective hasn’t changed, but given the number of author promo classes I see for people like me, it seems that the market’s has.  Where did this arise?  Why?  And has any hard data been produced which attributes increased book sales to non-writing activities such as blogging and creating book trailers?  Neither of which do anything to influence MY purchasing decision?  Anybody?

I haven’t made it through all the comments yet, but each of them causes me to want to respond to it, which makes for a fun discussion.

I’m undecided about the whole question of authors revealing their politics.  I prefer my authors to remain fairly anonymous so that what I know about them doesn’t colour my response to their work.

On the other hand, I’ve mostly found that the authors whose political views disgust me so much that I’d consider not buying them are authors I don’t enjoy anyway.  Yes, Orson Scott Card.  I was sold Ender’s Game by a young fellow in a book store, and the book hung around my piles for about two years before I finally admitted I’ll never get past the first page, and I gave it to the Library.  (What turned me off of him was his endless, patronizing, pompous, wrong-headed bullshit diatribes on his website.)

Likewise, I stopped reading Piers Anthony when his Author’s Notes got to be longer than the novel they were attached to.  (And, um, better written than the novel, if wrong-headed, pompous, etc.)

The politics do colour a story.  I’ve been enjoying Lora Leigh, until I got to Naughti Dreams.  It opens with the heroine being TORTURED.  As a plot device.  It’s not BSDM, she’s a spy caught by the enemy, and she’s being tortured.

I’m disgusted and disturbed that it’s become okay for torture to be a plot device in an erotic romance.  It threw me right out of the story, and I haven’t been able to pick it up again.  It sent me into a political diatribe, which I then inflicted on SB Sarah (sorry about that, I hope it wasn’t too incoherent), because I had to make my feelings KNOWN.  It made me think less of the author, and less of people who read her, including me.

And yet, I’m still going to pick up Mercury’s War as soon as it becomes available in my town.

I was also enjoying Catherine Mann’s HQN series.  I think she does the best job of portraying soldiers as real people (as opposed to superhero cut-outs).  However, in Blaze of Glory, the mission they were on was psy-ops training in which they were in a South American country, trying to impact how the populace would vote (for SpongeBob SquarePants).  And that really bothered me.  What is the US military doing in another country, campaigning in a sneaky, underhanded way for one party or another?

And yet.  I still enjoy her writing, and most of her stories.  I kind of miss that Wingmen Warrior series, I’m not enjoying the millionaire Desires nearly as much.

Okay, back to reading everyone else’s comments.

When did this expectation arise, and who
established this expectation?

I don’t know. But it just is. Maybe not to you, but to me, it is exists. And I know I am not the only one who feels this way. Tv and film, there is distance from the medium. But reading is much different. An author writes and gets you inside a character’s head…or inside several characters’ heads. Look at the discussions going on about “Twilight.” Readers get very attached to fictional characters. And I don’t think there is quite a rabid defense of character for tv or film. There’s more emotion there. More personal feelings.

And, come on, who wants to log on to a favorite author’s blog only to read that her political views are for asshats only? Um, not me. And, yes, I would take it personally, because it becomes some strange form of elitism or separation. A sort of ‘club’ for those who believe author’s stance only. And here I am by the sidelines hoping nobody notices when I tiptoe away. Nobody wants to feel like their beliefs are ludicrous, stupid, or uneducated. Please tell me why I would happily buy Author X’s books anymore if she just called me and those who have my political beliefs “idiots”?  Every time I put up that $7.99, I’d be thinking about her blog posts.  May not be ‘fair,’ may not be what should happen in an ‘open’ society where everyone has the right to their opinion. But just like that author has the right to her political opinions, I have a right to be offended by them and seek to go elsewhere for entertainment.

I don’t go to fiction writers for my political info. Wish they would think about that more often.