The Right’s Neglect of Art and Literature

Tonight, I was involved with an interesting twitter exchange that got me thinking about the right’s attitudes towards art, literature and culture.

They claim that they want the culture to change. There are a ton of nonfiction books scolding the society for the state it’s in and ranting about how it needs to change. There are commentators on the radio and television going on and on about how horrible things are today in society. Well, what do they expect?

The Right cannot ignore art and literature and then expect the culture to change. Politics alone will not do that. You can’t legislate morality. You have to change society through many different avenues, politics being only one of those.

Yes. Yes. I know the argument. I’ve heard it before. However, laws do not legislate morality, they legislate actions, which some equate with morality. But, they are not the same.

Cussing in front of a lady could land a man in jail at one time. Did not cussing in front of ladies change a man’s idea of the right or wrong of cussing? Of course not. It just punished the behavior. That same man could cuss up a storm when ladies weren’t present.

When you neglect society, eventually, society changed the laws. Which is exactly what has been happening over the past 50 years. We went from a society with cohesive traditional values and work ethic to a hedonistic society where “if it feels good do it” and individuals aren’t responsible for themselves.

So why conservatives think that ignoring culture, art and literature in favor of ranting about politics is going to somehow miraculously change society? They’re daft.

Last year, when I was at the National Diaper Bank Conference in Philadelphia, the keynote speaker talked about influencing moms in regards to caring for their children. She sited statistics that showed fictional television programs did more to change what people do than fact based PSAs. Mom’s emulated their favorite characters on the shows.

Messaging in shows is now a common practice. Watch any television show and you’ll see messaging designed to change your thinking on certain subjects as well as your actions.

Now when that is coming from an ultra liberal, that is a scary thing. The left has been using literature and art for a long time in order to change the direction of society. They have been putting in messaging to change the way you think and act. And it happens without you realizing it.

Feed yourself a steady diet of liberal leaning literature and you’ll soon find yourself agreeing with liberal ideals, whether you want to or not.

Why do you think the shift to supporting gay marriage happened so danged quickly? It was because literature and art were feeding this opinion into the minds of Americans.

Yes, it does sound very much like a conspiracy theory, but it’s not. It’s backed up by years of scientific and advertising research designed original to get consumers to buy certain products.

Contrast today’s liberal leaning, hate everything traditional, literature and art with classic shows from years ago.

Lately, I’ve been watching episodes of Zorro with Guy Williams. I had watched reruns of the show as a child and fell in love with the characters. I decided to look it up online and found some of the episodes on Youtube. Boy was I shocked.

There is a sense of class in the old show that has been long gone in modern TV. And as anyone who follows me on Twitter will know that I was impressed that there was a great respect for religion. The newer versions of the legend either eliminate religion completely or use it for comedic purposes with little respect shown.

As a child watching the old shows, Zorro, The Lone Ranger, Rocky & Bullwinkle, I wanted to emulate these types of characters. I wanted to be on the side of good and fight for what’s right.

If we want to return to a society of traditional values and morals, we need to focus on art and literature. We need to bring back the class and the morals that used to be integral in our society. We need to feed the minds with good solid stories, art, television and movies.

If you’re not into the arts, you can still do your part by supporting the advancement of conservative literature and art. Money gets those works out into the world where they can be influential. Heck, just talking about conservative authors and their works would do wonders to help build a solid foundation in which to rebuild the culture from the ground up.

I’m not talking conservative message fiction. I’m talking good stories grounded in conservative values. You don’t need to shove values down people’s throats to pass them on. Just create good stories that people want to read with good characters people want to read about and emulate.

If you need somewhere to start, check out MAGA 2020 & Beyond.

Finally, a fun collection of speculative fiction short stories and thought-provoking essays for people who want to Make America Great Again.” ~ Amazon Reviewer

 

Big Problems Within Pro Sci-Fi Markets

Jon Del Arroz interviews Kat Rocha, formerly of the Escape Artist Podcasts, about deep problems within their editorial structure. This isn’t limited to just this single professional market, but is an example of how the industry has chosen identity politics over quality stories.

DID THEY REJECT STORIES YOU PUSHED FORWARD OUTRIGHT BECAUSE OF IDENTITY POLITICS, REGARDLESS OF QUALITY?

I sat in on at least five editorial meetings with the idea of becoming familiar with their methods of stories selection. At first, the editors at Pseudopod were even handed in their approach. Stories passed to Editorial by slush readers were judged on quality of the content and nothing else. This was around the time that Escape Artists ownership changed hands, and I believe what I was witnessing was a hold over to when Murr & co still held the wheel. As time went on the focus changed drastically (and rapidly) under the new regime. Editorial wanted more and more attention exclusively on female authors and female-spotlighted events. As slush readers were directed to prioritize stories by women over men. It wasn’t so much a case of editorial outright saying “Women only” but by the time I left male authors and stories were almost never discussed.

Read the full interview on Jon’s blog here.

Mad Dog Moon: MAGA 2020

MAGA 2020 & Beyond by [Yiannopoulos, Milo, Del Arroz, Jon, Lamplighter, L. Jagi, Fontaine, Marina, Torgersen, Brad, Wright, John C., Finn, Declan, Andrews Sr., Arlan]I wrote two stories for MAGA 2020, and one will be coming soon, via my newsletter.

But the one that will be appearing in the anthology, out on November 8th, is “Mad Dog Moon.”

If you guessed that this was going to center around Secretary of Defense, Marine General James “Mad Dog” Mattis (Ret) … you’d be right.

The general joke around Mattis is that he is an unstoppable killing machine that will knife-hand you as soon as look at you. Perhaps sooner.

And, as one person asked … what sort of Marine do you have to be for other marines to refer to you as “Mad Dog”?

Let’s just say that it’s a question I try to answer.

If I were writing a flap copy for my MAGA 2020 short, it would be “President Trump has had it with ISIS, and has sent in his ultimate weapon of mass destruction: General Mad Dog Mattis.”

Funny enough, I’m told by one of my military experts that ISIS seems to be slated for demolition by the end of the year. ISIS may not even be around long enough for my short story about them being destroyed to be published. Damn it. Now I know what it was like for all of those thriller authors in 2003, when they thrashed about getting in one final Iraq is the villain stories before Saddam fell.

This is going to be fun.

Kirkus goes bad and other publishing news…

How Never-Satisfied Social Justice Mobs Are Ruining YA Book Publishing

As we’ve seen in Hollywood, television, and comics, young adult fiction audiences have been tuning out of the traditional platforms and seeking independent entertainment.
Jon Del Arroz

By 

 Last week, the professional review website Kirkus Reviews came under public fire after removing a positive review of “American Heart” by Laura Moriarty. They were pressured by an online mob of hate-reviewers who deemed the unreleased book problematic due to cultural appropriation, a politically correct code-term meaning a white person writing about any other race or culture. The book is about a young American who through friendship with a Muslim young woman learns to oppose U.S. government internment camps for Muslims.

Kirkus stated: “Kirkus’ diversity collections go beyond grouping by race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or dis/ability to consider the desired reading ‘experience.’ This consideration of experience—categorized as learning, cultural identification, or inclusion—is integral to the effectiveness of Kirkus Collections’ recommendations, as it addresses the demand for contextual information around diversity content.”

 This means the author’s identity is more important than the content he or she produces. By all accounts, including Kirkus’s own original review, Moriarty’s work was about the dangers of internment camps and racial discrimination. It was inclusive and pro-acceptance, tolerance and diversity, everything a far-left ideologue in theory champions. Yet even that isn’t enough in the world of 2017 outrage hysteria. This is the end result of political correctness, and is the most recent chilling example of censorship due to identity politics.

Moriarty isn’t alone. The publishing industry is riddled with discriminatory practices against authors who identify as white, male, Christian, or conservative. However, like other entertainment media that place identity politics over good, entertaining stories, sales have decreased considerably over the last decade. The trend continued into last year, with book sales down 6.7 percent year over year, as reported by publishers.org.

As we’ve seen in Hollywood, television, and comics, audiences have been tuning out of the traditional platforms and seeking independent entertainment. Many of these trends begin in the science fiction and young adult markets, genres that purport to be forward-thinking and youth-oriented, which has come to mean delving into extreme left-wing politics.

As Goes Science Fiction, So Goes All Publishing

Read more at The Federalist

More from Jon Del Arros and Superversive Press:

   

Alt-Hero Launches!

As noted on the blog of the Supreme Dark Lord, Vox Day, the Castalia House comics project known as “Alt-Hero” launched its funding round at Freestartr today.

Vox talks about this in the Darkstream tonight. The video is embedded below. He goes over the goals of the campaign, and the project, there. I encourage you to view the stream, and to check out the project’s page at Freestarter, because if you’ve been disturbed by the anti-Civilizational propaganda put out by DC and Marvel then this is your opportunity to do something useful about it. Here’s the pitch video from the campaign:

You can’t just destroy; you have to fork and replace to complete the victory. To defeat the subversive in comics, it requires forking and building a parallel structure that is intended to supplant and supercede the target. Alt-Hero is that forking and replacing, so if you want comics to be Superversive again then back Alt-Hero.

UPDATE: Alt-Hero met its initial funding goals in 4 HOURS! Fantastic!

Why do lady SF writers suck?

Before you seek to lynch me, let me clarify the title slightly. Not all female SF writers are bad and I work with a number of very talented ones. What I am wondering is, why do places like Escape Pod and others think they are so dreadful?

Jon Del Arroz has been doing some interesting investigative journalism and has discovered that the long running Science Fiction podcast Escape Pod has a policy of giving preference to female writers over male ones. There is also the phenomena of regular anthologies and magazine issues that are women authors only (or some other “minority”).

The question I have about all this is, Why? Are female writers of science fiction really so terribly unreadable that they can’t actually get published without needing to rely on someone taking pity on them? The long history of science fiction publishing would suggest otherwise with many female authors writing under male pseudonyms and have successful careers, not to mention the large number of female authors who do just fine without needing one. I’ve bought stories as editor of Sci Phi Journal and as editor of Astounding Frontiers. The last thing I care about when purchasing stories is the sex of the writer, all that matters is that the story is good.

Usually when I say things like this someone will articulate concepts like “structural oppression”, “unconscious misogyny” or some other political buzz phrase to excuse why they need to make excuses for bad female writing but I find this unconvincing. The reality that a woman can submit under an obviously male pseudonym means that the barrier doesn’t really exist, they can always bypass the gate keeper (if he exists) in such a fashion. Is there any research today that shows a large number of stories submitted to different magazines using different names of both sexes, that get accepted at different rates based on the sex of the author? I realise such research would be difficult to conduct because you can’t just submit the same story to the same editor with different pseudonyms and expect a useful result, but the same author (or group of authors) could easily submit under many different names, a large number of different stories, and then get some statistically useful results. At least then there would be evidence of this bias should it exist.

My guess is that they would discover that female writers get bought more often than male authors in certain markets and in other markets there would be no meaningful difference. They did a similar experiment in Australia where they degendered resumes and used voice disguising technology to conduct candidate interviews. In such environments the men did better than the women, and in a sexed environment they actually did worse. They ended up needing to discontinue the practice because it got the “wrong” answer.

So what is the answer? Should places like Escape Pod be giving women a helping hand when buying stories? Such a patronising practice is not going to do the women authors any real favours. A publishing credit with Escape Pod for a woman will now unavoidably seen as some sort of participation prize for a crappy author. Who can have any idea how good an female author is, if when she is published in Escape Pod the bar has been artificially lowered? Maybe she is a good writer but there is no way to tell because it isn’t a level playing field.

At Superversive Press, we have published the wonderful Dystopian story, The Product by Marina Fontaine. Why did we publish it? Because it is a great story of the struggle for freedom in a nightmare future. Read it today and see what a good lady SF writer looks like. Marina has no need of an artificial helping hand because she is talented and I would never want to suggest she was a lesser writer that needed such a leg up.

The real solution to the “problem” of “under representation” is not to lower the bar for crappy author but to encourage them to become better writers and to encourage them to persevere in the face of setbacks. Ladies if you want to succeed, then suck less and persevere more. It really is that simple.