Good right wing novels...

[nicegrrl]

Ok, I dont mean hokey right wing, I mean intelligent novels that lean to the right. I suppose Ayn Rand comes to mind. Most lit fiction leans to the left, but as I am writing my story and it becomes more and more intellectual, it slants to the right as I do.

I dont know- what are some examples of lit fiction that lean towards "conservative" ideals?

[PeeDee]

Well, I have this stack of sci-fi books resting against one of my bookshelves, because I haven't had a spare second (hour, really) to work them into my book collection. The stack is starting to lean heavily to the right and continues to lean to the right more so, no matter what author I add.

[nicegrrl]

Thanks PeeDee.

Very helpful.

[Shadow_Ferret]

I guess I just read novels for pleasure and never really noticed if they lean one way or the other in the political spectrum unless it's really heavy handed. In which case I just find that as bad writing, not something I deliberately seek out.

[wordmonkey]

Intelligent right-wing?

Isn't that an oxymoron?

I kid!

OK, I'm slipping on my flame-proof clothing now.

BWAH HA HA HA HA HAR!

[nicegrrl]

Really? Most lit fiction comes with some sort of political or cultural or even philosophical message. That's kind of what separates it from the pulpy stuff, isnt it?

[rugcat]

There aren’t a lot of good right wing novels because there aren’t a lot of good right wing authors.
And there aren’t a lot of good right wing authors because creatively and right wing ideas don’t mesh well.

I realize that statement is going to ruffle a few feathers. But I think it’s demonstrably true. Not just in writing, but in all creative fields. If you look at the actors who are generally considered to be among our finest (Robert De Niro, Meryl Streep, Dustin Hoffman, etc.,) they are almost all left wing or left leaning. Same goes for directors. Rock musicians - notoriously anti establishment. You’d be hard pressed to find a right wing jazz musician. I don’t know enough about contemporary visual arts to make an assertion, but I’ll bet it holds true. Historically, the art establishment was full of forgotten authoritarians, while the painters we revere today were the wild men of their times. Van Gogh. Picasso. Caravaggio was a hard drinking, brawling gay libertine flouting every convention of his time.

Of course, there are always exceptions, but I would guess that ninety percent of successful creative people are what we today call left wing. Or at the very least, anti-authoritarian. There is something in the creative process that seems to need a free thinking random, inclusive view of life to spark its birth. Since lefties tend to be more interested in the varieties of human experience, it’s easier for them to get under the skin of their characters. Right wingers tend to be more comfortable with established order, more comfortable with absolutes, and I believe that tends to suppress the spark needed for true creativity.

This is not about intelligence or ability. Many right wingers have impeccable writing skills and a high level of intelligence. But I don’t think its coincidence that the best right wing books are non-fiction.

This is not a value judgement. Without our creative people, society would be drab indeed. But without the more right wing professions, such as police, society would be a nightmare. Without the military, our society might well not be around at all. I’m in awe of the creative genius of the best artists among us, but I’m perhaps more in awe of the engineers and construction workers who build suspension bridges and high rises. Those professions usually attract more wing types. It’s a different type of creativity.

And of course, this is all broad generality for which many exceptions can be found.

[nicegrrl]

Yeah, I kind of have to agree that there are not very many good right wing creative people in any field. Somehow the rebellious Mozart is superior to jingoistic Straus and Kinkaid cant even be called serious art while Rothko can.
Tom Wolfe and Saul Bellow are I think moderately conservative compared to most literary types.

I dunno. Today liberalism is so firmly entrenched in intellectual spheres that the rebellious ones are the "conservatives".

[fjeastman]

I'm not going to speak on whether or not right-wing individuals are creative or perceived as creative.

I will say I've never appreciated overtly political literature in either direction, and I've never found that knowing the political beliefs of a writer has ever led to an increase in my enjoyment of their work.

Opposite has held true, though.

I think Ann Coulter wrote a fiction book, but I highly doubt it was SF or F. A quick search of her site shows she has a list of "Readings for Right Wingers" but I didn't really look through the list to see if there were any political SciFi/Fantasy works listed.

--fje

[merper]

Well it would help if you could define what you mean by right wing. Are you talking smaller government/lower taxes/realpolitik right wing or ultraconservative/religious zealot/neocon right wing? Because there's plenty of intelligent novels that support the former, but I doubt there are any of the latter...

[maestrowork]

http://www.amazon.com/George-Bush-God-Country-Patriotism/dp/1591609186/sr=8-4/qid=1158467186/ref=pd_bbs_4/002-5017931-5406453?ie=UTF8&s=books

http://www.amazon.com/George-W-Bush-Portrait-Leader/dp/141430983X/sr=1-3/qid=1158467248/ref=pd_bbs_3/002-5017931-5406453?ie=UTF8&s=books

And this:

http://www.amazon.com/Compassionate-Conservatism-Does-Transform-America/dp/0743201310/sr=1-1/qid=1158467388/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-5017931-5406453?ie=UTF8&s=books

[John61480]

I don't suppose Hunter S. Thompson is right wing? Unless Bush is right wing, then I'm waaaay off. Then I may as well forget about mentioning Kurt Vonnegut jr. How about the book Animal Farm? Okay, I don't think your interested in any of these, are you?

[Gary]

If you enjoy adventure, military fiction, or mysteries, there are many writers who lean to the right, or who are politically neutral enough not to screw up a good story.

I'm currently reading The Camel Club by David Baldacci and the constant, subtle, left-wing preaching is severely testing my gag reflex. I don't recall his other books being that bad, but it's the last book of his that I'll ever buy.

Patrick Davis, Brian Haig, Richard Herman, John Nance, Vince Flynn, Nelson DeMille and Lee Child are among my favorites.

[ChaosTitan]

Check out your local Christian Bookstore. Chances are the authors you find are pretty conservative.

[Zisel]

A lot of Mikhail Bulgakov's work leans right. Heart of a Dog comes to mind. You might want to try some of Solzhenitsyn's fictional work, too, although these are really pretty balanced.

Z

[Jamesaritchie]

If you mean high profile, Tom Clancy's better novels are all right wing. The Hunt for Red October, Red Strom Rising, Patriot Games, Clear and Present Danger, and Without Remorse are all good.

There's also William F. Buckley, of course. That's about as conservative as you can get.

But it's a myth to think all writers and creative people lean to the left. This isn't even true in Hollywood. It's just that squaky wheel get all the grease. I've seen estimates that even Hollywood is 40% conservative. In most forms of fiction writing, the left wing, right way numbers break down roughly the same as they do outside of writing.

I've met just as many right wing writers as left wing writers. Most just don't make a show of it. Even science fiction has a healthy share of consrvatives and libertarians.

I think teh perception that the creative fields are filled with those on the left comes about because those on teh left tend to write books, make movies, etc., that expouse their philosophy. Most of those on the right tend to write books and make movies that are simply entertaining.

Though I do sispect that genre matter. Most of the right wing writers I've known write in the mystery/suspense/thriller fields, and most of the left wing writers I've known write in either "literary" or SF genres.

The best right wing books are NOT nonfiction, they are simply books where the writer doesn't believe he has to fill every page with his own personal philosophy.

By and large, I read both types of writers, but when a writer starts beating me over the head with politics or social agendas at the expense of story, I stop reading. Kim Stanley Robinson is unreadable for me simply because everything he writes screams his personal view on everything, and I don't give a damn about his views. I read novels for an entertaining story and good characters, not because I want to hear some idiot expouse political and social agendas.

In other words, I don't care if you're left wing or right wing, don't try to send me a message, don't tell me your philosophy is the correct one, don't try to send me a message that you think will change the world. Shut the hell up and just tell me an entertaining story filled with good characters. It's the story and the characters I want, not your opinion on the world, on Bush, on Clinton, etc. I'm all grown up, I watch the news and read newspapers each and every day, and I probably know at least as much as you do about what's happening in the world. Likely more. I don't need a fiction writer putting a slant on it.

Just tell me a good story, fill it with good characters, and get rid of the notion that I'm going to adjust my philosophy, or change my beliefs, because of anything you write. Preaching to the choir never has done any good, and that's all such writers do.

[Tracy]

Wasn't it Goldwyn who said, "If you want to send a message, use the telegraph". (Or words to that effect) He was talking about cinema but the principle is the same - stories are to entertain, not to educate.
Now, I'm not saying I agree wholeheartedly with that sentiment, just pointing out that it's a point of view.
What I do think is that a story's job is to entertain. If it educates/opens eyes/widens opinions at the same time, that's a bonus, but it's not its purpose.

[Susan Gable]

I also don't think you can completely tell a writer's personal leanings based on novels. Sometimes my characters believe exactly the opposite from what I believe. I don't force them to "convert." I write what works for them and the story.

Susan G.

[nicegrrl]

Other than romances, I generally dont like reading stories without heavy intellectual content, which doesnt neccesarily mean they lean towards any paticular ideology, but they often do. Personally, the message and the character dev are what entertain me, not the actual story.

JA, it is probably true that left leaning authors are merely more likely to expouse their philosophies in books.

Zisel, thanks- I really like Bulgakov.

merper, I am not talking about neoconservatism although I think it would be interesting to see a fictional work with a neoconservative slant. The Left Behind series maybe?

[aadams73]

Other than romances, I generally dont like reading stories without heavy intellectual content

Oh boy...

:popcorn:

[nicegrrl]

Tracy, I'm all about the purposes of education. For years, I didnt even read any fiction although I read several non fic books per week. Now, I read fiction, but I still dont read much genre fiction and only like books with some sort of intellectual message for the real world. I dont even care what the message is. Give me Ishmael and American Psycho over straight entertainment any day. I havent read for the pure entertainment of a story since I was a child. I guess this is going to be a problem for me.

[rugcat]

1. But it's a myth to think all writers and creative people lean to the left. This isn't even true in Hollywood. It's just that squaky wheel get all the grease. I've seen estimates that even Hollywood is 40% conservative. In most forms of fiction writing, the left wing, right way numbers break down roughly the same as they do outside of writing.



2. I think teh perception that the creative fields are filled with those on the left comes about because those on teh left tend to write books, make movies, etc., that expouse their philosophy. Most of those on the right tend to write books and make movies that are simply entertaining.


3. By and large, I read both types of writers, but when a writer starts beating me over the head with politics or social agendas at the expense of story, I stop reading.

James, I must respectfully disagree.

1. Maybe 40% of Hollywood is conservative if you include producers, studio heads, and best boys, but on the creative side, do you really think that 40% of actors, for example, are conservative? Charlton Heston, Mel Gibson, Tom Selleck, come to mind, but they're memorable precisely because they're so rare. To say that the creative community in Hollywood is only slightly liberal is, I think, off the mark.

As far as writers go, I'm not talking about numbers, I'm talking the relationship between liberal thinking and creative pursuits. If one made a list of the 100 "greatest" authors of the 20th century (yeah, I know, lists like that are stupid and pointless, but people do make them) do you believe that list would break down 50-50 between liberals and conservatives?

2. Political polemics are not the exclusive property of the left. I think both liberals and consevatives are equally guillty of this, and equally annoying when they do it.

3. Well, at least we agree on something.

Maybe my use of the political terms right wing and left wing was ill advised. For one thing, people are usually more complex than that. I have some libertarian friends who are extremely "right wing," who hold some surprising views. (The government has no right to tell anyone who they can have sex with, or who they can marry. The government has no right to tell anyone what drugs they're allowed to put into their body. The government has no right to tell anyone they can't own as many fully automatic assault rifles as they want.)

This is not to say that conservative views preclude creativity. All I'm saying is that in general, I believe creativity and culturally liberal views tend to go hand in hand, more so than conservative views, and I stand by that opinion. Again, I'm not talking about specific works with a political slant or agenda; I'm simply noting a correlation between the artistic community and liberal thought.

.

[Carrie in PA]

If you mean high profile, Tom Clancy's better novels are all right wing. The Hunt for Red October, Red Strom Rising, Patriot Games, Clear and Present Danger, and Without Remorse are all good.

There's also William F. Buckley, of course. That's about as conservative as you can get.

But it's a myth to think all writers and creative people lean to the left. This isn't even true in Hollywood. It's just that squaky wheel get all the grease. I've seen estimates that even Hollywood is 40% conservative. In most forms of fiction writing, the left wing, right way numbers break down roughly the same as they do outside of writing.

I've met just as many right wing writers as left wing writers. Most just don't make a show of it. Even science fiction has a healthy share of consrvatives and libertarians.

I think teh perception that the creative fields are filled with those on the left comes about because those on teh left tend to write books, make movies, etc., that expouse their philosophy. Most of those on the right tend to write books and make movies that are simply entertaining.

Though I do sispect that genre matter. Most of the right wing writers I've known write in the mystery/suspense/thriller fields, and most of the left wing writers I've known write in either "literary" or SF genres.

The best right wing books are NOT nonfiction, they are simply books where the writer doesn't believe he has to fill every page with his own personal philosophy.

By and large, I read both types of writers, but when a writer starts beating me over the head with politics or social agendas at the expense of story, I stop reading. Kim Stanley Robinson is unreadable for me simply because everything he writes screams his personal view on everything, and I don't give a damn about his views. I read novels for an entertaining story and good characters, not because I want to hear some idiot expouse political and social agendas.

In other words, I don't care if you're left wing or right wing, don't try to send me a message, don't tell me your philosophy is the correct one, don't try to send me a message that you think will change the world. Shut the hell up and just tell me an entertaining story filled with good characters. It's the story and the characters I want, not your opinion on the world, on Bush, on Clinton, etc. I'm all grown up, I watch the news and read newspapers each and every day, and I probably know at least as much as you do about what's happening in the world. Likely more. I don't need a fiction writer putting a slant on it.

Just tell me a good story, fill it with good characters, and get rid of the notion that I'm going to adjust my philosophy, or change my beliefs, because of anything you write. Preaching to the choir never has done any good, and that's all such writers do.

^^ What he said.

I personally wouldn't presume to assume an entire industry leans one way or another simply because some prominent members are extremely vocal. Besides, 85% of all statistics are made up on the spot, right?

[ted_curtis]

William S. Cohen, former Republican Senator and Secretary of Defense has written a handful of novels. I guess he's be considered Right-leaning (although really more of a moderate by today's standards).

Also, some of Michael Crichton's stuff is notably right-leaning as well as fairly popular -- I believe one of his most recent books was about eco-terrorists, and he also had one where sexual harrassment was abused to get back at someone.

But my own two-cents: write a d@mn good book. People will read it no matter what your political slant.

[ted_curtis]

Besides, 85% of all statistics are made up on the spot, right?

Really? I thought it was 77%...I'll have to go check my sources...yep, I was right.

[ctheokas]

A lot of Mikhail Bulgakov's work leans right. Heart of a Dog comes to mind. You might want to try some of Solzhenitsyn's fictional work, too, although these are really pretty balanced.

Z


That's only in a relative sense. When the Devil is one of your heroes, you can't be that far to the right.

[Carrie in PA]

Really? I thought it was 77%...I'll have to go check my sources...yep, I was right.

I'll only concede to 79%.

[limitedtimeauthor]

State of Fear, Crichton. Not really literary fiction, but not simply an action/adventure novel either. Very intellectual. I had to take notes just to keep up. (Just kidding.) As far as political leanings, let's just say it won't be on Al Gore's recommended reading list.

And I know exactly what you mean when you say there are so many left-leaning literary novels. They don't have to be heavy-handed or overt to be nauseating. :-) The only people who can't see it aren't trying to.

The arguments about how authors shouldn't expose their philosophies are naive. Stories are how people are "educated" in a certain philosophy. But of course it has to be a good story -not just a poorly disguised political rant - else no one will buy into except those who already agree. The spoonful of sugar method for influencing public opinion - lefties use it a lot.

And I don't lean all the way in either direction. (I guess that means I'm straight up. :D ) But I get tired of people believing that conservatives aren't free-thinkers. The U.S. was founded on what would today be considered conservative principles and yet they - the founders -- were radical free-thinkers. Anyway, just because someone believes, for example, that lower taxes are a good stimulus for the economy, doesn't mean that person has a steel rod up his or her imagination. ahem. Or someone who believes in, I don't know, capitalism or whatever, has the mind of an accountant.

Trust me on this. I would never make it as an accountant. But I love capitalism.

[gp101]

There aren’t a lot of good right wing novels because there aren’t a lot of good right wing authors.
And there aren’t a lot of good right wing authors because creatively and right wing ideas don’t mesh well.




So if you had a list of the 100 best-selling authors, you'd be able to tell us which are right-wing and which are left? I'd be most impressed, if not suspicious. I'm thinking your stats are what you hope them to be. I point this out not because I want to cheer on any right-wing writers or causes, but because sweeping generalizations like this irk me--any yes, I'd post a similar response had you said that about left-wing writers. Small generalizations I can buy, but broad strokes with absolutes just rattle my cage, and in my experience, tend to be wrong. I couldn't tell you what any of my favorite authors' political slants are. Don't want to know them, either. How can you possibly know who's a right-wing novelist unless they publicly state it (and I'm guessing that most don't)? I don't see biases leaning one way or another in most novels.

The writer's job is to write, not run for office, and I think that most of them realize that if they preached their political beliefs, whether overtly or covertly, then they stand the chance to lose half the country as an audience; we've been pretty much 50-50 down the line during our last two national elections.

Other than Clancy and Rand (both, obviously leaning right), and Carl Hiaasen (a lot of environmentalism in his novels), I can't think of major authors who show their personal political views through their writing. I'd be bored/frustrated/aggravated to death if they did, as a lot of commercial fic readers would be.

Getting back to the original post, it inquired about conservative novels, so how conservative turned to right-wing is as unfair as comparing liberal to left-wing. Conservatives and liberals are closer to the middle than their extremist brethren in the -wings. She also mentioned novels, so the references by some to right-wing non-fic ain't much help.

Your best bet, NIceG, would be to search out Christian novels, as someone mentioned, or a Clancy or Rand. Other than that, I'm not sure where else you'd find a conservative viewpoint in commercial fic. I don't think I've seen much of it in literary fic either. I'm also not sure why you'd want to find it. Non-fic is your best bet, and if you want to be uplifted or sent a message about the human condition, there are plenty of novels that do it without political biases.

ETA I just remembered hearing that Pat Robertson, former Republican/Independent candidate for Prez, former co-host of CNN's "Crossfire", and staunch right-winger, has written a novel with someone regarding the Civil War. Don't know how conservative it is, but it's a pretty good bet that it's more red than blue.

[Shadow_Ferret]

Tracy, I'm all about the purposes of education. For years, I didnt even read any fiction although I read several non fic books per week. Now, I read fiction, but I still dont read much genre fiction and only like books with some sort of intellectual message for the real world. I dont even care what the message is. Give me Ishmael and American Psycho over straight entertainment any day. I havent read for the pure entertainment of a story since I was a child. I guess this is going to be a problem for me.

I read fiction for entertainment, not enlightenment. I don't even think fiction should have an intellectual message. If I want that, I'll go read some books on philosophy or other non-fiction (which I do). But I certainly don't want it from my fiction. Just shut up and entertain me.

[NeuroFizz]

For most (but not all) fiction, the only soap boxes in the stories should actually contain soap.

[Tirjasdyn]

Larry Niven....

Specifically: Fallen Angels

You'll never look at Nader again in the same way.

[Akiahara]

.... this thread made me thing a little bit. i'd say i'm pretty liberal, so i wouldn't want to read something that was "slanted to the right"... but it made me think of what i read.

it may be complex in world building and have intellectual characters... but if i had to read a message about society from the author, i'd probably completely miss it, or really hate it. why put that sort of thing in fiction? if you're writing all dan brown style, i suppose it fits... but for most of us... why not just leave it alone?

[zarch]

I must be the exception. I'm a conservative writer/jazz musician/educator.

[RJLeahy]

I think almost by defintion, it would be hard to write a great "conservative" novel. I mean that literally. The definition of conservative: "tending to oppose change. Traditional or restrained in style."

And yet, the books we think of as classics, those worthy of greatness, are those that push the envelope, either artistically, or in their themes. If you define liberals as thumbing their nose at the status quo and societal norms, then the list of the 100 greatest books of the 20th century is decidedly liberal.

Catch-22 , Heller
The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck
To Kill a Mockingbird, Lee
Catcher in the Rye, Salinger
Go Tell it on the Mountain, Baldwin
Ulysses, Joyce
Lolita, Nabokov

The list goes on obviously, but most of these books were either derided by the right as being "leftist propaganda", or banned entirely. Great novels inevitably tell the fight of the less advantaged. This just doesn't sit with most right-wing ideology, I'm afraid.

[skylarburris]

Conservative authors don't tend to write "literary fiction." The genre itself does not tend to lend itself to conservative values and outlooks because it is generally more "emotional" than "cerebral." Conservatives fair better in more cerebral genres such as satire. Most of your great satirists tend to lean to the right (or at least vociferously away from the left): Evelyn Waugh, Herman Wouk, Jane Austen, G.K. Chesterton, C.S. Lewis, Tom Wolfe, Thackery, Jonathan Swift, Nathaniel Hawthorne, George Orwell, Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. (to a degree), etc.

It's tricky to label a "right wing" novel because "right wing" is hard to define. There are 100 shades of conservative, and conservatives argue among one another like cats and dogs; they love intellectual wrestling matches with one another. Do you mean "libertarian"? Well, then, Ayn Rand certainly comes to mind. Anti-communist? You've got Alexander Solzyhneitzhen. You've got George Orwell, but he was a socialist, which is usually considered leftist.

I disagree with the general agreement that novels should not have intellectual content. The novels that have impressed me the most deeply have all had philosophical content--The Brothers Karamazov, Middlemarch, The Fountainhead, Animal Farm, 1984, Brave New World, etc.

But it is true that, in general, left leaning people are more likely to slip thier idealogy into music, film, literature, and indeed every day conversation than are right leaning people. So there may be many more right leaning novelists out there--you just don't know it because they don't make a point of it.

I think almost by defintion, it would be hard to write a great "conservative" novel. I mean that literally. The definition of conservative: "tending to oppose change. Traditional or restrained in style."

Well, if you reject almost all of the great satires...this might be true. The thing is, conservatives only oppose change when the left is not the status quo. And since the left is the status quo in the media and the arts and the academy...well, conservatives are gung ho about change. And they are happy to mock the changes that the left has brought in--thus the satire.

[Higgins]

There aren’t a lot of good right wing novels because there aren’t a lot of good right wing authors.
And there aren’t a lot of good right wing authors because creatively and right wing ideas don’t mesh well.

I realize that statement is going to ruffle a few feathers. But I think it’s demonstrably true. Not just in writing, but in all creative fields. If you look at the actors who are generally considered to be among our finest (Robert De Niro, Meryl Streep, Dustin Hoffman, etc.,) they are almost all left wing or left leaning. Same goes for directors. Rock musicians - notoriously anti establishment. You’d be hard pressed to find a right wing jazz musician. I don’t know enough about contemporary visual arts to make an assertion, but I’ll bet it holds true. Historically, the art establishment was full of forgotten authoritarians, while the painters we revere today were the wild men of their times. Van Gogh. Picasso. Caravaggio was a hard drinking, brawling gay libertine flouting every convention of his time.

<snip>


You may have named all the great left-wing painters. Okay, Delacroix and maybe Girogione. And Titian and Tintoretto and Goya, And all the Expressionists and Abstract Expressionists..so that's only say 20,000 out of 100,000 painters who are leftwing.

As for Right-wing painters we could have: Giotto, Cimabue, Piero della Francesca, Fra Angelico, Botticelli, Signorelli, All of the Bellinis, Velasquez, Zurbaran and Ingres. Running low here...Okay so maybe 8 out of 10 painters are a bit lefty. But that still leaves 20,000 rightwingy painters.

[Akiahara]

i'm curious what classifies a right wing painter. i don't see giotto as a right wing painter... he was actually a pioneer of the renaissance. the only conservative thing was his subject matter, but all the art of that era was religious. well, almost all of it. he defied what was common at that time to create a new style. o.O

[NeuroFizz]

I disagree with the general agreement that novels should not have intellectual content. The novels that have impressed me the most deeply have all had philosophical content--The Brothers Karamazov, Middlemarch, The Fountainhead, Animal Farm, 1984, Brave New World, etc.
My comment was (with my bolding):
For most (but not all) fiction, the only soap boxes in the stories should actually contain soap.

Great writers, and some good ones, can build a story that professes an ideology symbolically (and have done so successfully), but the vast majority of stories I have read do not have this overt emphasis. There may be themes that center on platforms emphasized by political parties or other political entities, but they usually are not the property of these parties/entities. My opinion is that if an author pushes a theme too hard for political purposes, he/she risks authorial intrustion into the story that could very well turn readers off. Again, in my opinion, themes should be undercurrents, not face-smackers, and the author and his/her political views should be as invisible as possible. Yet, this is a matter of style, and some writers may have a style that pushes (or appears to push) a particular view that strums contemporary political strings. There have been a few cases in which I have appreciated the symbolic or clever treatment of political leanings in works of fiction, but in most, I have never tried to envision the political beliefs of an author from how he/she wrote the story. I want to get lost in the story without feeling the author is standing over me in a pulpit or at a lecturn.

[Gary]

I think almost by defintion, it would be hard to write a great "conservative" novel. I mean that literally. The definition of conservative: "tending to oppose change. Traditional or restrained in style."

And yet, the books we think of as classics, those worthy of greatness, are those that push the envelope, either artistically, or in their themes. If you define liberals as thumbing their nose at the status quo and societal norms, then the list of the 100 greatest books of the 20th century is decidedly liberal.

Catch-22 , Heller
The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck
To Kill a Mockingbird, Lee
Catcher in the Rye, Salinger
Go Tell it on the Mountain, Baldwin
Ulysses, Joyce
Lolita, Nabokov

The list goes on obviously, but most of these books were either derided by the right as being "leftist propaganda", or banned entirely. Great novels inevitably tell the fight of the less advantaged. This just doesn't sit with most right-wing ideology, I'm afraid.

Obviously, you have to consider who voted the list.

I've read Catch-22 and Ulysses and neither was memorable. I thought perhaps it was because I was in high school when I read them, but after seeing the movie Catch-22, I realized it was simply boring, with a silly plot and unrealistic characters.

I tried to read Grapes of Wrath and To Kill a Mockingbird and couldn't get interested enough to finish either.

[RJLeahy]

All lists are subjective, but I would imagine that if you asked most literate people to name the 100 best english language novels of the 20th century, these would be on them.

[Gary]

I don't think anyone can even question the fact that most people in the arts and entertainment business lean to the left, but I don't think it has as much to do with talent as with focus.

Those with a conservative bent are more inclined to be builders and inventors and do-ers. They tend to be focused on a career based on doing, and creating things, while the other side focuses more on thinking about it and giving their opinion how it should be done. Of course, nothing is ever either/or, but the evidence is there to view.

I began my adult life as a liberal and evolved to the right over a period of years, mostly because I worked with engineers, who were almost all conservative or libertarian. Their logical approach to problems trumped how I "felt" about the situation, so I changed the way I viewed everything.

However, I still consider myself reasonably artistic, if not talented. I paint in oils, carve birds from wood, design and build cabinets and furniture, and dabble at writing fiction. FWIW, my fiction is not chest-thumping, strictly guy stuff either, and I avoid injecting my political views into the story.

[gp101]

I don't think anyone can even question the fact that most people in the arts and entertainment business lean to the left, but I don't think it has as much to do with talent as with focus.

I'd go further and say that conservative parents are more likely to encourage their kids to become doctors or work for a company for twenty years to get a pension or join the military, over following their dream to join a rock band. Liberal parents are more likely than conservatives, I think, to encourage their kids' interest in the Arts as a vocation.


Those with a conservative bent are more inclined to be builders and inventors and do-ers. They tend to be focused on a career based on doing, and creating things, while the other side focuses more on thinking about it and giving their opinion how it should be done. Of course, nothing is ever either/or, but the evidence is there to view.

I think that may be going a little too far.

I began my adult life as a liberal and evolved to the right over a period of years...

I did the same thing but have since settled nicely into the middle. Best of both worlds.

[blacbird]

Obviously, you have to consider who voted the list.

I've read Catch-22 and Ulysses and neither was memorable. I thought perhaps it was because I was in high school when I read them, but after seeing the movie Catch-22, I realized it was simply boring, with a silly plot and unrealistic characters.

I tried to read Grapes of Wrath and To Kill a Mockingbird and couldn't get interested enough to finish either.

So what exactly do you find interesting? (Hint: It's really hard for me to imagine somebody finding either of these latter two novels un-interesting).

RR

[skylarburris]

My opinion is that if an author pushes a theme too hard for political purposes, he/she risks authorial intrustion into the story that could very well turn readers off.

Well, I certainly agree that is a risk. I just don't think religion/philosophy/idealogy should be completely absent from novels and that they should be pure entertainment. Well, some are fine as pure entertainment--I've read plenty of enjoyable pop fiction that falls into that category, but none of the truly great novels eschew philosophy or idealogy. Even books like The Fountainhead and The Brother's Karamazov, where there are indeed soap boxes and clear, lengthy philosophical passages, impress me. But I like mulling over philosophy and theology and read a great deal of nonfiction, so I may approach novels differently than most people.

began my adult life as a liberal and evolved to the right over a period of years, mostly because I worked with engineers, who were almost all conservative or libertarian. Their logical approach to problems trumped how I "felt" about the situation, so I changed the way I viewed everything.

This is why I think when you do find conservative novelists, you mainly find them writing satire, a more intellectual, more unemotional genre. I am hard pressed to think of a large number of liberal satirists.

The list of the 100 greatest books of the 20th century is decidedly liberal.

Catch-22 , Heller
The Grapes of Wrath, Steinbeck
To Kill a Mockingbird, Lee
Catcher in the Rye, Salinger
Go Tell it on the Mountain, Baldwin
Ulysses, Joyce
Lolita, Nabokov

I'm not sure why you'd call Lolita "decidedly liberal." Nabakov was a social conservative, and the novel itself is in the tradition of conservative novels in which the novelist accepts the innate evil of human nature. Novelists like Nabakov tend to disdain more liberal writers who, because they see human nature as inherently good, are socially active "progressives". The Lord of the Flies is another novel in this conservative tradition, as is everything Hawthorne wrote, as is The Heart of Darkness.

But yes, if you define "liberal" as thumbing your nose at the status quo, perhaps you could get away with calling it that. But why would you define "liberal" that way? Both liberals and conservatives want change when the status quo is not how they would like it to be. And the status quo is not always everywhere conservative, so why would conservatives want to preserve it? They certainly don't want to preserve the "status quo" in the universities and the media and in Hollywood and in society today. They thumb their noses at it constantly.

[Shadow_Ferret]

I don't think anyone can even question the fact that most people in the arts and entertainment business lean to the left, but I don't think it has as much to do with talent as with focus.



Has anyone actually seen censuses to attest to this? Or is this just hearsay and speculation?

This whole notion that liberals write literature and push the envelope and somehow a conservative can only write satire is ludicrous.

I personally don't think your political philosophy has anything to do with your artistic outlook.

One could probably make the case that the best artists are apolitical because then their political leanings don't get in the way of a good product.

[Sesselja]

This thread reminded me of an article I read a while back:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/dick200511020853.asp


(Sorry if this has already been linked to elsewhere on the forum)

[skylarburris]

Has anyone actually seen censuses to attest to this? Or is this just hearsay and speculation?

This whole notion that liberals write literature and push the envelope and somehow a conservative can only write satire is ludicrous.

I didn't say conservatives could only write satire, I said they dominate the genre, and liberals dominate many other genres. Conservatives have a pretty strong showing in sicence-fiction also, for instance.

But if you don't think the arts & entertainment industry is largely liberal, you have blinders on. Name ten living, popular conservative actors. Name six living, popular conservative directors. Name two conservative anchormen on ABC, NBC, or CBS.

I'll give you that music is a more diverse field, mostly because of the country, gospel, and Christian genres. But movies and television tend left. There's a reason conservatives took to radio. There's a reason conservatives built their own publishing houses. They had to, because the media and publishing industry was dominated by liberalas, and they couldn't get their feet in the door. Now, there's no telling the politics of most pop. novelists, so there may be plenty of quiet conservatives there. But the books that tend to get the attention of the academy tend to have some liberal content because the academy tends to be liberal. You're more likely to be assigned Alice Walker than Ayn Rand. I never even heard Ayn Rand mentioned in school.

Philosophy affects artistic outlook because philosophy affects outlook period. A philosophy that does not affect how you see things is not much of a philosophy, by defenition.

[Kristal]

I think everyone is getting left brain and right brain confused with conservatives and liberals.

The side of the brain that one uses, has nothing to do with what political stance they take. Being a conservative has nothing to do with being an intellectual thinker, and being a liberal does not mean creative.

There is a smattering of both (left and right brainers) on both political stances. What BELIEFS you have determines what political side you take. And even in that, each part has a corrupt view of the other side as well.


”Republicans...all they care about is the big companies and Democrats are the ones that care about the little guy.”

”Democrats...they are all baby haters and don't care about human life.”


Both statements are crap and are untrue.
A creative mind is a creative mind....no matter what personal opinions they have. What makes a good writer is someone that is passionate about whatever they are trying to share...not what political/spiritual beliefs they have.

And as far as hollywood, they tend to be more worldly thinkers, so those who have more religious beliefs, either are pushed away, or tend to stay away....it doesn't mean that can't do it as well.

By the way....I have a music degree, very artistic, a writer....

AND A CONSERVATIVE

Geesh.


--Kristal

[NeuroFizz]

There is way too much generalization and stereotyping going on in this thread. Does anyone have actual data to back up the statements being made here? How does one determine if an author is a liberal or a conservative? If one makes that determination based on the words he writes, the argument immediately becomes circular. For example, if one writes satire, they must be conservative, therefore, most satire is written by conservatives. And by extension, liberals are incapable of writing satire. (This is a purposeful exaggeration.)

[Carrie in PA]

There is way too much generalization and stereotyping going on in this thread. Does anyone have actual data to back up the statements being made here? How does one determine if an author is a liberal or a conservative? If one makes that determination based on the words he writes, the argument immediately becomes circular. For example, if one writes satire, they must be conservative, therefore, most satire is written by conservatives. And by extension, liberals are incapable of writing satire. (This is a purposeful exaggeration.)

Let's not muddy the point with facts and data. Who are you to get all... reasonable?? Sheesh.

[Gary]

So what exactly do you find interesting? (Hint: It's really hard for me to imagine somebody finding either of these latter two novels un-interesting).

RR

It's been many years, so I don't recall my mindset at the time but I do recall that Grapes of Wrath was terribly depressing and I don't read books that make me depressed. I just couldn't get interested in either book.

I enjoy reading all kinds of books, but my tastes and interest change from time to time. My usual read is a mystery or a spy thriller, but I recently read Marley, and Hunting Bin-Laden. I've read stories as diverse as Atlas Shrugged, Bridges of Madison County and The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

I assume your question was meant to discover if I was interested in the classics...if I had any literary taste...or if I have been exposed to good literature. Well, everything depends on the story, not the rating from the "experts". Flowery prose and big words do nothing for me if the story is one I dislike, and I won't waste my time reading a book I dislike, simply to be snobbish.

Mostly I don't care for those books that make the top 100 list. The stories usually don't interest me, so if that means I have no taste, I must plead guilty. Perhaps it's because I was raised on a dirt farm without running water or electricity, and Grapes of Wrath was just more of what I saw as a child. Or maybe it's because I didn't have the opportunity to go to college that makes me unimpressed by pseudo-sophisticates and coffehouse malcontents who wrote a boring book trumpeted by their peers.

I guess I'm just one of the "great unwashed" that the elitists are forced to put up with.

[Shadow_Ferret]

But if you don't think the arts & entertainment industry is largely liberal, you have blinders on. Name ten living, popular conservative actors. Name six living, popular conservative directors. Name two conservative anchormen on ABC, NBC, or CBS.



Sorry, I don't track entertainers by their political affiliations. I can't name ten actors or six directors, period.

That why I want to see surveys on this. Perception is one thing, because as james said earlier, the most outspoken ones get the attention. That doesn't mean you can extrapolate that to mean all actors are liberal.

I'm sure for every loud-mouth there are several who never let their political agenda color their world.

[Higgins]

i'm curious what classifies a right wing painter. i don't see giotto as a right wing painter... he was actually a pioneer of the renaissance. the only conservative thing was his subject matter, but all the art of that era was religious. well, almost all of it. he defied what was common at that time to create a new style. o.O

You have a good point there. Okay. Probably almost all painters are lefties.

What about Byzantine Mosaic-makers? They might have been pretty conservative, what with all that hanging upside down in clouds of incense 300 feet above the altar of the Hagia Sophia. I know that would make me want to make sure that property rights if any kind were enforced at the expense of human life in all circumstances except for the lives of pregnant mosaic-makers in sacred settings in the case of rape or incest or incense.

[RJLeahy]

As regards to Nabokov (who always declared he was apolitical), I included Lolita as a liberal novel only because it was derided as such by conservative groups when published, and still is today. Both the Christian Coalition and Focus on the Family have called it "liberal smut".

[Shadow_Ferret]

As regards to Nabokov (who always declared he was apolitical), I included Lolita as a liberal novel only because it was derided as such by conservative groups when published, and still is today. Both the Christian Coalition and Focus on the Family have called it "liberal smut".
But conservative groups deride anything that isn't the Bible as "liberal smut" so that isn't a good indicator on whether something is a liberal novel or not. And I don't believe you can extrapolate that what conservative groups find acceptable to what a conservative writer would find as acceptable material.

[RJLeahy]

But conservative groups deride anything that isn't the Bible as "liberal smut" so that isn't a good indicator on whether something is a liberal novel or not. And I don't believe you can extrapolate that what conservative groups find acceptable to what a conservative writer would find as acceptable material.

I doubt they consider Tom Clancey's work "liberal smut." :)

[Shadow_Ferret]

I doubt they consider Tom Clancey's work "liberal smut." :)

But I'm sure they could find something wrong with it. ;) People have a way of finding offense in everything.

[Higgins]

Conservative authors don't tend to write "literary fiction." The genre itself does not tend to lend itself to conservative values and outlooks because it is generally more "emotional" than "cerebral." Conservatives fair better in more cerebral genres such as satire. Most of your great satirists tend to lean to the right (or at least vociferously away from the left): Evelyn Waugh, Herman Wouk, Jane Austen, G.K. Chesterton, C.S. Lewis, Tom Wolfe, Thackery, Jonathan Swift, Nathaniel Hawthorne, George Orwell, Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. (to a degree), etc.

<snip>



What's right-wing in Jane Austen? Oh and note she is the only woman up there in the pantheon of "Right-Wing Satirists"...

And where's the satire? In her Juvenalia? Certainly by her Last book Persuasion, you're looking at a writer whose almost bitter irony is anything but satirical and very far from right-wing. I suppose her far-from-simplistic views on poetry and sensibility might sound like some one with doubts about Romanticism, but, except in England, Romanticism is the beginning of the Modern Right in its glorification of various "Folks" and their simple goodness in hating inner city youth and people who are in other ways outside the Folk and its non-verbal wisdom and wholesome gut reactions.

[Kristal]

But conservative groups deride anything that isn't the Bible as "liberal smut" so that isn't a good indicator on whether something is a liberal novel or not.
Are you really that ignorant? Ever visit a Christian bookstore lately? It has far more than bibles on the shelves. I just picked up a historical fiction novel about Robin Hood. I have also read other historical fiction, fantasy, romance that is all in the Christian bookstore. I also read mainstream fantasy...including Harry Potter.

It is as smart as saying that liberals are all hippy tree huggers and all they do is sit around and meditate and have group sex....wait...(gasp)...do they?

You have eccentrics everywhere. I wish people would stop trying to generalize everyone.

[Higgins]

Are you really that ignorant? Ever visit a Christian bookstore lately? It has far more than bibles on the shelves. I just picked up a historical fiction novel about Robin Hood. I have also read other historical fiction, fantasy, romance that is all in the Christian bookstore. I also read mainstream fantasy...including Harry Potter.

It is as smart as saying that liberals are all hippy tree huggers and all they do is sit around and meditate and have group sex....wait...(gasp)...do they?

You have eccentrics everywhere. I wish people would stop trying to generalize everyone.

Geepers, I loved that Tom Clancy Robin Hood novel where Little John was an intelligent missile that had the wrong mental codes and had sex with Robin Hood instead of blowing him.
Up with a warhead! that's what was implied by the punctuation anyway.

The infrared scopes that the Sherrif of Nothingham had could not see men in green tights at all....and that was just the first few champters.

[Kristal]

Geepers, I loved that Tom Clancy Robin Hood novel where Little John was an intelligent missile that had the wrong mental codes and had sex with Robin Hood instead of blowing him.
Up with a warhead! that's what was implied by the punctuation anyway.

The infrared scopes that the Sherrif of Nothingham had could not see men in green tights at all....and that was just the first few champters.

Um...now that would be an original plotline....not good...but original!

:)

[Shadow_Ferret]

Are you really that ignorant? Ever visit a Christian bookstore lately? It has far more than bibles on the shelves. I just picked up a historical fiction novel about Robin Hood. I have also read other historical fiction, fantasy, romance that is all in the Christian bookstore. I also read mainstream fantasy...including Harry Potter.

It is as smart as saying that liberals are all hippy tree huggers and all they do is sit around and meditate and have group sex....wait...(gasp)...do they?

You have eccentrics everywhere. I wish people would stop trying to generalize everyone.

Name calling? :Shrug:

I don't recall saying anything about "Christians."

I fully admit I was generalizing about conservative groups. It was tongue-in-cheek. I guess for your benefit I should have added a smiley.

And yes, I was in a Christian book just last week. Getting my son an adventure bible. I didn't have time to look at the whole place, but they did have an awful lot of bibles.

[Higgins]

Um...now that would be an original plotline....not good...but original!

:)

As a dry narrative it lacks the insight into the minutiae of technical bandwaggons that Clancy brings to every problem. For example, while "Little John" is the name of the first batch of "Honest John" tactical nuke missiles fielded by NATOCENCOM in the first Operation Golden Bough Mythology Homework Freedom, its a little-known fictional fact that the mental programming for the Little John was written in the 18th century by Adam Smith on an Abacus in musical notation. And not just any Abacus, but one tuned to a tiny pipe organ (positive organ for you Early Music in Tom Clancy fans) made by Benvenueto Cellini during a brief bout with Conservative Organ Fever during the Sack of Rome in 1527. The infamous Dominican ex-Inquisitor Phillipo BASTINATO helped with some of the target aquisition logic built into the mean tone tuning of the organ.

[Kristal]

Name calling? :Shrug:

I don't recall saying anything about "Christians."

I fully admit I was generalizing about conservative groups. It was tongue-in-cheek. I guess for your benefit I should have added a smiley.

And yes, I was in a Christian book just last week. Getting my son an adventure bible. I didn't have time to look at the whole place, but they did have an awful lot of bibles.

Generalizing with, or without a smiley is more than likely going to offend someone. I am annoyed with the whole genralizing thread...not just you :D (added smiley just for you)


As far as mentioning Christians...Christian authors tend to be conservative...(that was mentioned earlier on this thread)...and would be an easy place to pick up conservative writing without weeding through the mainstream market.

(prepare yourself for stupid generalizing comment)

Why were you picking out a bible? I didn't think liberals read them. :):):)

(By the way...I don't believe this....just proving a point)

[Shadow_Ferret]

Liberals call me a conservative and conservatives call me a liberal. I'm unclassifiable. :)

If you check out my other threads, I think I was complaining about the blatant generalization, too. You just happened to choose the thread where I was getting a little silly.

As far as the Bible, my sons attend a Lutheran school.

[Kristal]

Liberals call me a conservative and conservatives call me a liberal. I'm unclassifiable. :)

Phew....ok then, I guess you can get a bible. ;)


It is hard to tell if someone is kidding or not on message boards.

I am conservative on my beliefs...but not very political at all.

[skylarburris]

What's right-wing in Jane Austen? Oh and note she is the only woman up there in the pantheon of "Right-Wing Satirists"...

And where's the satire? In her Juvenalia? Certainly by her Last book Persuasion, you're looking at a writer whose almost bitter irony is anything but satirical and very far from right-wing. I suppose her far-from-simplistic views on poetry and sensibility might sound like some one with doubts about Romanticism, but, except in England, Romanticism is the beginning of the Modern Right in its glorification of various "Folks" and their simple goodness in hating inner city youth and people who are in other ways outside the Folk and its non-verbal wisdom and wholesome gut reactions.

The satire is in all of her novels. She wrote satire. That was her genre. And I didn't say right wing, I said conservative. (Right wing is way too loaded and too parochial a term--I'm just discussing conservatives.) Her novels support the notion of tradition and stability. Because she has strong female characters, does that make her a liberal? You know, there are strong female conservatives. Many scholars consider Jane Austen to be a conservative novelist, and she was raised in a strong Tory family, and her political sympathies were largely conservative, so I'm not quite sure where your question is coming from. She was definitely anti-Romantic, as are pretty much all satirists by definition. Romanticism is the notion that man is inherently good, which is not, in general, a conservative notion, and all this goes back to my comments about writers like Conrad and Hawthorne and Golding. The Romantics, with the exception of Wordsworth, who did not become conservative until later life, were generally considered liberals. And since when is satire not bitter and not ironic? And if I may ask, what does her being the only woman on my list have to do with any of this?

[Shadow_Ferret]

Are we deriving our definition of conservative from old philosophers like Hume, Hobbs and Locke?

[skylarburris]

There is way too much generalization and stereotyping going on in this thread. Does anyone have actual data to back up the statements being made here? How does one determine if an author is a liberal or a conservative? If one makes that determination based on the words he writes, the argument immediately becomes circular. For example, if one writes satire, they must be conservative, therefore, most satire is written by conservatives.

I'm basing most of my suggestions for "conservative novelists" on biography--i.e. what the writers themselves say (usually outside the novels, sometimes within) about thier philosophical beliefs, or what party they belong to, or how the preponderance of scholars have interpreted them in thier own time. When I say Evelyn Waugh is a conservative, I'm not just guessing. But when I say Orwell is a conservative, I mean that only in so far as he is anti-Communist, because he's socialist, which is certainly not conservative...to repeat again, I think it is hard to define conservative novels because it is hard to define conservatism. The satirists I listed all have reputations either for being conservative by the standards of thier place and time, or, if not actually conservative, then at least anti-leftist. When I think of all the great satirists, most of the ones I can think of happen to have a reputation for being conservatives. I'm not claiming all writers of satire are conservative, or that all conservative novelists write satire!

[Higgins]

The satire is in all of her novels. She wrote satire. That was her genre. And I didn't say right wing, I said conservative. (Right wing is way too loaded and too parochial a term--I'm just discussing conservatives.) Her novels support the notion of tradition and stability. Because she has strong female characters, does that make her a liberal? You know, there are strong female conservatives. Many scholars consider Jane Austen to be a conservative novelist, and she was raised in a strong Tory family, and her political sympathies were largely conservative, so I'm not quite sure where your question is coming from. She was definitely anti-Romantic, as are pretty much all satirists by definition. Romanticism is the notion that man is inherently good, which is not, in general, a conservative notion, and all this goes back to my comments about writers like Conrad and Hawthorne and Golding. The Romantics, with the exception of Wordsworth, who did not become conservative until later life, were generally considered liberals. And since when is satire not bitter and not ironic? And if I may ask, what does her being the only woman on my list have to do with any of this?

If there is satire (and I don't think there is) in Jane Austen, what is it that she satirizes? Life in the Provinces? Gothic Novels?
Also, strong female characters aren't unusual in Novels, but strong female characters who turn down marriage proposals the way Elizabeth Bennett does are pushing in a far more liberal than conservative direction especially in the early 19th century. As in fact does EB in all things such as standing up for a steward against aristocratic prejuidices. I don't think there are any conservative female satirists, hence the oddity of her being supposedly the only one.
Romanticism is the beginning of rightwing nationalism, which is, in general, a conservative thing. She and her major influence Fanny Burney, would never have stood for any rightwing nationalist stuff, and obviously had more tolerance for English Romanticism (which was not conservative) than French or German Romanticism (which was definitely conservative).

And how anti-Romantic was she? There's no trace of anti-Romanticism in Persuasion, her last novel.

[NeuroFizz]

I'm basing most of my suggestions for "conservative novelists" on biography--i.e. what the writers themselves say (usually outside the novels, sometimes within) about thier philosophical beliefs, or what party they belong to, or how the preponderance of scholars have interpreted them in thier own time. When I say Evelyn Waugh is a conservative, I'm not just guessing. But when I say Orwell is a conservative, I mean that only in so far as he is anti-Communist, because he's socialist, which is certainly not conservative...to repeat again, I think it is hard to define conservative novels because it is hard to define conservatism. The satirists I listed all have reputations either for being conservative by the standards of thier place and time, or, if not actually conservative, then at least anti-leftist. When I think of all the great satirists, most of the ones I can think of happen to have a reputation for being conservatives. I'm not claiming all writers of satire are conservative, or that all conservative novelists write satire!
Your evaluation is still woefully lacking in any kind of rigorous testing, including consistent operational definitions of liberal and conservative that would stand up to acceptance by even a small group of concerned individuals from a cross-sectional sample. It all boils down to your educated opinion, which I respect as such. Your points are interesting, and you have given it much thought. You present useful and intriguing background information on iconic writers, and I thank you for that. Any broad application of your opinions, however, remains suspect.

[Anthony Ravenscroft]

As the right-leaning (?) Kurt Vonnegut says,
The last thing I ever wanted was to be alive when the three most powerful people on the whole planet would be named Bush, Dick and Colon.
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0205-29.htm

(FWIW, that's one of those anti-American Leftie rags.)

Merely because a writer's anti-Communist doesn't make them Rightward; witness Orwell & Wylie. And even Heinlein, though a staunch Republican, was a progressive humanist, though I suppose that wouldn't make sense to two-pigeonhole thinkers.

It's kinda weird how some people think a Socialist can be a Conservative merely for failing to be extreme enough.

Anyone who wants "conservative humor" enjoys Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Mike Savage, et al. That kinda says it all. Leftists delight in skewering their own; rightists only go after heathens & other enemies of True Belief.

Fascism is extreme conservatism, not liberalism. Make of that what you will.

[gp101]

Liberals call me a conservative and conservatives call me a liberal. I'm unclassifiable. :)


Hey, Rudy Giuliani, welcome to the boards! You have my vote if you run next year. Just don't wear the damn Yankees jacket.

[Higgins]

I'm basing most of my suggestions for "conservative novelists" on biography--i.e. what the writers themselves say (usually outside the novels, sometimes within) about thier philosophical beliefs, or what party they belong to, or how the preponderance of scholars have interpreted them in thier own time. When I say Evelyn Waugh is a conservative, I'm not just guessing. But when I say Orwell is a conservative, I mean that only in so far as he is anti-Communist, because he's socialist, which is certainly not conservative...to repeat again, I think it is hard to define conservative novels because it is hard to define conservatism. The satirists I listed all have reputations either for being conservative by the standards of thier place and time, or, if not actually conservative, then at least anti-leftist. When I think of all the great satirists, most of the ones I can think of happen to have a reputation for being conservatives. I'm not claiming all writers of satire are conservative, or that all conservative novelists write satire!

No amount of trying to dress the rightwing up in the hoary togas of "conservatives" like, say, novelists who adore Cato & Plato (sounds like a Vaudeville magic "act"), is really going to get at the question.

[RedMolly]

Stephen Colbert's Alpha Squad 7: Lady Nocturne: A Tek Jansen Adventure.

It's even being serialized in animated form (http://www.colbertnation.com/cn/tekjansen.php).

[Higgins]

Stephen Colbert's Alpha Squad 7: Lady Nocturne: A Tek Jansen Adventure.

It's even being serialized in animated form (http://www.colbertnation.com/cn/tekjansen.php).

Leaves just the right amount to the imagination alright.

[limitedtimeauthor]

I think everyone is getting left brain and right brain confused with conservatives and liberals....

By the way....I have a music degree, very artistic, a writer....

AND A CONSERVATIVE

Geesh.


--Kristal

Thank you, Kristal. That's what I was trying to say! :)

[Rob Gregory Browne]

Really? Most lit fiction comes with some sort of political or cultural or even philosophical message. That's kind of what separates it from the pulpy stuff, isnt it?What do you consider pulpy stuff? And why should it be separated?