Fiction writer here. Good storytelling boils down to one important principle that Stephen King discusses in his book "On Writing": Tell the truth. You can't always know going into a story what that truth is going to be, because the characters really do take on a life and personality of their own (it's a wild thing to have happen, but ask fiction writers, and they'll tell you it's real). Imposing your personal political beliefs on each character (including imposing the inverse on the anti-heroes) almost always sets the story up for bad, cliched writing, and one-dimensional characters. Unfortunately, a lot of writers think they have to do this, because they are given this bad advice by editors and other writers. Really great novelists, in my view, don't get caught up in quotidian politics. They're aiming higher, trying to uncover the deeper truths about human life and what existence means.
This comment from almost 17 years ago has stuck with me:
To be a great artist is inherently right wing. A great artist like Dylan or Picasso may have some superficial, naive, lefty things to say, but underneath, where it counts, there is a strong individual, taking responsibility for his place in the world and focusing on that.
Art (that stands test of time) is not political. Who knows (or cares about) the politics of Dickens or Hemingway or Michelangelo or Homer. Political motives in art are obvious and usually dull. And yes, you can project your political agenda onto art. The greatest art often has opposite sides of political spectrum claiming it.
My wife has a modern dance company and was trained in NYC with the great modern dancers of the age. She is the only one who has any divergent beliefs compared to her peers. That's a huge advantage, but it does not fit in the "dance world."
Her art is *different* from the crowd because she has the personal vision (ie conservative) of how her dance art presents the human emotional condition, and disregards the current political fads. She choreographs as an artist with a life and experience, while her peers choreograph their political feelings. But the industry leaders (and the typical audience) are blind to human experiential art, and only filter the political emotional experience to the top.
The other side (ie a conservative audience) has no clue what good (or even bad) dance looks and feels like. They do not (and would not) know what to fund or even to enjoy unless there is an equal and opposite emotional political experience.
(Shameless incoming: She has a SoCal show coming in May and would love for all of you to attend.)
Such an important subject. As a working artist/writer who is deeply conservative, I am always looking for ways to express truths that transcend politics. I am more moved by art that isn't preaching one side or another. Agree that White Lotus was a complex approach to real people. Thanks for another good one, Mike.
This is the first time I'm commenting on a Cerno post, in large part because I've always self-consciously feared I'd post something stupid or midwit and get banned, yet this article spoke to me in a deep way that made me want to offer my two cents. When I was a kid right wingers would argue with their liberal or leftist friends over things like taxes and abortion and gun control. Nowadays youre arguing over whether the Russians are rigging American elections or whether the government can control the f'in weather if only theyre given enough funding and authority oflver the entire economy, and of course, whether MEN can menstruate and have babies.
I watched this show knowing that the writers wanted me to see Aubrey Plaza as one of the "good people," but I wanted her to be the one who dies every episode. Same with most of the other characters--context clues were embedded to tell me that i should like or dislike this or that character, but the way they were SYMPATHETICALLY portrayed made me feel the exact opposite way towards them then the hints told me I should. It would be as if the Iliad and Odyssey had a subtext that "Agammemon is really the good guy here"--a reasonably intelligent person simply cant willingly suspend that much disbelief. The people who would believe such a thing live in different realities and moral codes than the average person. They cant help revealing that when they tell you that the toxic characters they accurately portrsy are actually the virtuous ones.
Monty Python did this in Holy Grail with the Sir Robin character. The obvious coward of the group was ironically portrayed as a knight worthy of the Round Table. Everyone watching the movie gets that this is a satire and this knight is contemptible. Modern leftist tv producers write in Sir Robin characters and demand that their audiences actually believe that he is courageous. No.
And the worst part, why this subject resonates with me emotionally, is that they expect you to agree with their take. Thats how weve managed to get to the point of where being asked what you thought of the latest Netflix hit can rapidly turn into a political argument. "I DIDNT LIKE IT." Instead of, "okay lets talk about something else its, but cant you see the point theyre trying to make about racism/sexism/etc in America. Do you not care about these issues." Damn dude, I just didnt like the characters.
I am a "conservative" novelist and filmmaker, that's my default in terms of politics, so I appreciate your post. This is something I think about a lot. The wokeness of the art universe is, on one hand, a sad realiity, because it limits the understanding of woke artists, but, on the other hand, it gives non-woke, straight up clear-eyed artists an opportunity, since art, by my definition, reflects beauty and truth faithfully, as normal humans experience it, and only non-woke, clear-eyed art will endure.
I work with a number of non-woke artists who do not believe that art works very well as propaganda. Not only do they avoid political and social propaganda, they do not even think in those terms. We'll be soon be publishing novels on Substack that a conservative audience should find refreshing, however, if a reader is looking for an endorsement of their politics, they won't see that, either.
The problem now is that almost everything produced as a cultural artifact is defined and processed through a political lens. This is the horrible problem that artists now face when it comes to marketing and finding an audience. A well-educated, non-political mass audience doesn't seem to exist. In any case, an artist shouldn't be pigeon-holed into producing either conservative or liberal/woke art. To avoid politics completely means an avoidance of reality, and artists can't avoid reality, unless perhaps they are creating fantasy or painting landscapes, etc.
At the very least, the conservative world needs to be asking the right questions, and supporting non-woke artists, yet not blindly supporting artists who produce mediocre art with the label "conservative". Art is not just another political tool. The best art transcends politics. Today we are deluged with trivial entertainment, and true artists can only toil away in the cultural ghetto in near anonymity, as has often been their plight throughout history.
I'm a working conservative artist, and have been trying to think of how I can "advance" conservative ideas without being overtly political..
I think left-wing thought has no borders - everything is permissible, everything is possible, anyone can change, every person's perspective is "valid" (unless it's hateful, like a right-winger).
Right-wing has borders - trying to be a Christian, or live like one, which limits the content and speech someone can use, and brings up questions of "should I say this".. there's an idea that you should hold your tongue - while left-wing thought encourages you to live your truth and yell out anything that feels real. Right-wing is measured, careful, don't want to ruffle feathers if I don't need to.. and why do we NEED another movie, we have perfectly good movies at home! Art feels self-indulgent.
Being a conservative making art feels like navigating a bunch of laser beams, trying not to touch them and trigger an alarm - being a liberal making art is like a self-expression rave dancing with lasers. I've been both. I'm finding it hard to get over the over-rationalizing-legalistic hump where I can relax into creativity again.
Well, propaganda we shall always have with us, from every side. I'm still pissed at how "The Chronicles of Narnia" turned out, and I was a little disconcerted, many years after reading these, to learn the purpose behind "Johnny Tremain" and the Little House series.
As a Jew born and raised in NYC, I found "Dirty Dancing" clownishly heavy-handed when it came out. it could have been a bad satire just as much as an attempted sneaky bit of left-wing propaganda. It was in every possible way distasteful.
When a young conservative Substacker expressed teary-eyed admiration for "Saving Private Ryan," I observed that any film being made in recent times with a WWII heroic plotline must be immediately suspect as softening us up for some unwarranted military action somewhere we don't actually belong.
I haven't watched "The White Lotus," just as I stopped watching "Succession" after five minutes or so and only tried it because I love Brian Cox. Everything these days, purportedly realistic or purportedly fantastical, is almost entirely about tawdry sleazy skanky people no one should name their kids after.
Sometimes a great show manages to overcome the handicap of the mostly dreadful people it portrays. Where would one slot "Orphan Black?" At its core, it's about the meaning of family and how one must do everything within one's human power to protect one's children. It had a little too much torture porn for my taste but its message was still unforgettably clear.
Even "The Americans, which started off almost buffoonishly ridiculous in its setups, ended with an act of ultimate love and devotion that could be anticipated to come at great cost--Paige who would not abandon her brother while their parents figured they could take their chances on him ending up OK.
I mostly watch Korean TV shows and a few Israeli ones, these days--nothing much elsewhere of any creative or geopolitically sophisticated value.
I guess part of it goes back to your last article - we're in a post-literate society - but the other part of it is traction. Artists are usually identified as left wing, and they help amplify other artists like themselves. On the flip side, more right wing folks will amplify a stock or business idea, and mostly view art as a waste of time - they certainly don't view it as work despite the fact it requires deep contemplation and effort. Truth be told, I've been writing a novel for years - free on my substack - and I find it's sometimes impossible to get friends to promote it, despite them liking the theme, having it speak to them, etc. etc.
The greatest right wing art is traditional architecture.
I was floored When trump issued an executive order targeting modern architecture. I havent followed up and I am sure it amounted to nothing, but it was an incredible moment and one of the greatest things he did in office.
I liked how White Lotus, 1st Season, explored the divide between upper class and middle-class. There was the expected moral posturing against the rich - their exploitation of the natives, the manchild behavior. And after the moralizing speeches, the middle-class characters opted to stick by their upper class connections as a safe and easy option. Resentful and seething, but just not being good enough to leave.
Really simple actually. There is a personality dimension called “openness to experience” and it is strongly correlated to artist endeavors. And that same factor correlates with liberalism
There are right wing artists--good ones too, not just kitschy Fox Nation Patriot Awards tier boomerism. What we need more of are right wing patronage networks to promote those artists. The good news is people are starting to realize this...step one is always acknowledge there's a problem.
Rob Roy is the most "right wing" least Hollywood major film I've ever seen. It came out the same summer as Braveheart (which was also a very good heroic story we could call "right wing" today). I was 14 when I saw these films. My son is now 12 and I plan to introduce them to him pretty soon.
Puss in Boots is on our list thanks to Mike's review. We'll wait until it rents for less than 25 bucks.
Bukowski is a favorite "right wing": writer of mine. Very flawed main character based on himself, far from a heroic archetype but fearlessly honest about life as it was and in many ways still is. My novels "Prodrome" and "Terre Haute. Fargo. Bed" strive like Bukowski's work for total messy masculine honesty with humor and a punch.
If y'all could check these books out and leave Amazon reviews I'd very much appreciate it. My ability to keep working a job in the current climate is vanishing. Just today I got put on unpaid administrative leave as HR "invesyigates" a conversation I had with a black co-worker after HE asked ME about a book I was reading (it was Mark Judge's Kavanaugh book) and HE continued asking ME follow up questioms in a wide ranging discussion. I was surprised he was a snitch bitch about it. I didnt think he was that type. But now the women in HR are ponderong firing me. Best job I've ever had, though as low paying as all the others. I was barely making it. Now maybe.not.
Fiction writer here. Good storytelling boils down to one important principle that Stephen King discusses in his book "On Writing": Tell the truth. You can't always know going into a story what that truth is going to be, because the characters really do take on a life and personality of their own (it's a wild thing to have happen, but ask fiction writers, and they'll tell you it's real). Imposing your personal political beliefs on each character (including imposing the inverse on the anti-heroes) almost always sets the story up for bad, cliched writing, and one-dimensional characters. Unfortunately, a lot of writers think they have to do this, because they are given this bad advice by editors and other writers. Really great novelists, in my view, don't get caught up in quotidian politics. They're aiming higher, trying to uncover the deeper truths about human life and what existence means.
This comment from almost 17 years ago has stuck with me:
To be a great artist is inherently right wing. A great artist like Dylan or Picasso may have some superficial, naive, lefty things to say, but underneath, where it counts, there is a strong individual, taking responsibility for his place in the world and focusing on that.
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/09/so-what-exactly-did-scorsese-do.html#c112792822975605103
Art (that stands test of time) is not political. Who knows (or cares about) the politics of Dickens or Hemingway or Michelangelo or Homer. Political motives in art are obvious and usually dull. And yes, you can project your political agenda onto art. The greatest art often has opposite sides of political spectrum claiming it.
My wife has a modern dance company and was trained in NYC with the great modern dancers of the age. She is the only one who has any divergent beliefs compared to her peers. That's a huge advantage, but it does not fit in the "dance world."
Her art is *different* from the crowd because she has the personal vision (ie conservative) of how her dance art presents the human emotional condition, and disregards the current political fads. She choreographs as an artist with a life and experience, while her peers choreograph their political feelings. But the industry leaders (and the typical audience) are blind to human experiential art, and only filter the political emotional experience to the top.
The other side (ie a conservative audience) has no clue what good (or even bad) dance looks and feels like. They do not (and would not) know what to fund or even to enjoy unless there is an equal and opposite emotional political experience.
(Shameless incoming: She has a SoCal show coming in May and would love for all of you to attend.)
Such an important subject. As a working artist/writer who is deeply conservative, I am always looking for ways to express truths that transcend politics. I am more moved by art that isn't preaching one side or another. Agree that White Lotus was a complex approach to real people. Thanks for another good one, Mike.
This is the first time I'm commenting on a Cerno post, in large part because I've always self-consciously feared I'd post something stupid or midwit and get banned, yet this article spoke to me in a deep way that made me want to offer my two cents. When I was a kid right wingers would argue with their liberal or leftist friends over things like taxes and abortion and gun control. Nowadays youre arguing over whether the Russians are rigging American elections or whether the government can control the f'in weather if only theyre given enough funding and authority oflver the entire economy, and of course, whether MEN can menstruate and have babies.
I watched this show knowing that the writers wanted me to see Aubrey Plaza as one of the "good people," but I wanted her to be the one who dies every episode. Same with most of the other characters--context clues were embedded to tell me that i should like or dislike this or that character, but the way they were SYMPATHETICALLY portrayed made me feel the exact opposite way towards them then the hints told me I should. It would be as if the Iliad and Odyssey had a subtext that "Agammemon is really the good guy here"--a reasonably intelligent person simply cant willingly suspend that much disbelief. The people who would believe such a thing live in different realities and moral codes than the average person. They cant help revealing that when they tell you that the toxic characters they accurately portrsy are actually the virtuous ones.
Monty Python did this in Holy Grail with the Sir Robin character. The obvious coward of the group was ironically portrayed as a knight worthy of the Round Table. Everyone watching the movie gets that this is a satire and this knight is contemptible. Modern leftist tv producers write in Sir Robin characters and demand that their audiences actually believe that he is courageous. No.
And the worst part, why this subject resonates with me emotionally, is that they expect you to agree with their take. Thats how weve managed to get to the point of where being asked what you thought of the latest Netflix hit can rapidly turn into a political argument. "I DIDNT LIKE IT." Instead of, "okay lets talk about something else its, but cant you see the point theyre trying to make about racism/sexism/etc in America. Do you not care about these issues." Damn dude, I just didnt like the characters.
I am a "conservative" novelist and filmmaker, that's my default in terms of politics, so I appreciate your post. This is something I think about a lot. The wokeness of the art universe is, on one hand, a sad realiity, because it limits the understanding of woke artists, but, on the other hand, it gives non-woke, straight up clear-eyed artists an opportunity, since art, by my definition, reflects beauty and truth faithfully, as normal humans experience it, and only non-woke, clear-eyed art will endure.
I work with a number of non-woke artists who do not believe that art works very well as propaganda. Not only do they avoid political and social propaganda, they do not even think in those terms. We'll be soon be publishing novels on Substack that a conservative audience should find refreshing, however, if a reader is looking for an endorsement of their politics, they won't see that, either.
The problem now is that almost everything produced as a cultural artifact is defined and processed through a political lens. This is the horrible problem that artists now face when it comes to marketing and finding an audience. A well-educated, non-political mass audience doesn't seem to exist. In any case, an artist shouldn't be pigeon-holed into producing either conservative or liberal/woke art. To avoid politics completely means an avoidance of reality, and artists can't avoid reality, unless perhaps they are creating fantasy or painting landscapes, etc.
At the very least, the conservative world needs to be asking the right questions, and supporting non-woke artists, yet not blindly supporting artists who produce mediocre art with the label "conservative". Art is not just another political tool. The best art transcends politics. Today we are deluged with trivial entertainment, and true artists can only toil away in the cultural ghetto in near anonymity, as has often been their plight throughout history.
I'm a working conservative artist, and have been trying to think of how I can "advance" conservative ideas without being overtly political..
I think left-wing thought has no borders - everything is permissible, everything is possible, anyone can change, every person's perspective is "valid" (unless it's hateful, like a right-winger).
Right-wing has borders - trying to be a Christian, or live like one, which limits the content and speech someone can use, and brings up questions of "should I say this".. there's an idea that you should hold your tongue - while left-wing thought encourages you to live your truth and yell out anything that feels real. Right-wing is measured, careful, don't want to ruffle feathers if I don't need to.. and why do we NEED another movie, we have perfectly good movies at home! Art feels self-indulgent.
Being a conservative making art feels like navigating a bunch of laser beams, trying not to touch them and trigger an alarm - being a liberal making art is like a self-expression rave dancing with lasers. I've been both. I'm finding it hard to get over the over-rationalizing-legalistic hump where I can relax into creativity again.
Well, propaganda we shall always have with us, from every side. I'm still pissed at how "The Chronicles of Narnia" turned out, and I was a little disconcerted, many years after reading these, to learn the purpose behind "Johnny Tremain" and the Little House series.
As a Jew born and raised in NYC, I found "Dirty Dancing" clownishly heavy-handed when it came out. it could have been a bad satire just as much as an attempted sneaky bit of left-wing propaganda. It was in every possible way distasteful.
When a young conservative Substacker expressed teary-eyed admiration for "Saving Private Ryan," I observed that any film being made in recent times with a WWII heroic plotline must be immediately suspect as softening us up for some unwarranted military action somewhere we don't actually belong.
I haven't watched "The White Lotus," just as I stopped watching "Succession" after five minutes or so and only tried it because I love Brian Cox. Everything these days, purportedly realistic or purportedly fantastical, is almost entirely about tawdry sleazy skanky people no one should name their kids after.
Sometimes a great show manages to overcome the handicap of the mostly dreadful people it portrays. Where would one slot "Orphan Black?" At its core, it's about the meaning of family and how one must do everything within one's human power to protect one's children. It had a little too much torture porn for my taste but its message was still unforgettably clear.
Even "The Americans, which started off almost buffoonishly ridiculous in its setups, ended with an act of ultimate love and devotion that could be anticipated to come at great cost--Paige who would not abandon her brother while their parents figured they could take their chances on him ending up OK.
I mostly watch Korean TV shows and a few Israeli ones, these days--nothing much elsewhere of any creative or geopolitically sophisticated value.
I guess part of it goes back to your last article - we're in a post-literate society - but the other part of it is traction. Artists are usually identified as left wing, and they help amplify other artists like themselves. On the flip side, more right wing folks will amplify a stock or business idea, and mostly view art as a waste of time - they certainly don't view it as work despite the fact it requires deep contemplation and effort. Truth be told, I've been writing a novel for years - free on my substack - and I find it's sometimes impossible to get friends to promote it, despite them liking the theme, having it speak to them, etc. etc.
Amazing work Cernovich.
The greatest right wing art is traditional architecture.
I was floored When trump issued an executive order targeting modern architecture. I havent followed up and I am sure it amounted to nothing, but it was an incredible moment and one of the greatest things he did in office.
I liked how White Lotus, 1st Season, explored the divide between upper class and middle-class. There was the expected moral posturing against the rich - their exploitation of the natives, the manchild behavior. And after the moralizing speeches, the middle-class characters opted to stick by their upper class connections as a safe and easy option. Resentful and seething, but just not being good enough to leave.
Really simple actually. There is a personality dimension called “openness to experience” and it is strongly correlated to artist endeavors. And that same factor correlates with liberalism
There are right wing artists--good ones too, not just kitschy Fox Nation Patriot Awards tier boomerism. What we need more of are right wing patronage networks to promote those artists. The good news is people are starting to realize this...step one is always acknowledge there's a problem.
Rob Roy is the most "right wing" least Hollywood major film I've ever seen. It came out the same summer as Braveheart (which was also a very good heroic story we could call "right wing" today). I was 14 when I saw these films. My son is now 12 and I plan to introduce them to him pretty soon.
Puss in Boots is on our list thanks to Mike's review. We'll wait until it rents for less than 25 bucks.
Bukowski is a favorite "right wing": writer of mine. Very flawed main character based on himself, far from a heroic archetype but fearlessly honest about life as it was and in many ways still is. My novels "Prodrome" and "Terre Haute. Fargo. Bed" strive like Bukowski's work for total messy masculine honesty with humor and a punch.
If y'all could check these books out and leave Amazon reviews I'd very much appreciate it. My ability to keep working a job in the current climate is vanishing. Just today I got put on unpaid administrative leave as HR "invesyigates" a conversation I had with a black co-worker after HE asked ME about a book I was reading (it was Mark Judge's Kavanaugh book) and HE continued asking ME follow up questioms in a wide ranging discussion. I was surprised he was a snitch bitch about it. I didnt think he was that type. But now the women in HR are ponderong firing me. Best job I've ever had, though as low paying as all the others. I was barely making it. Now maybe.not.