A recent article in the American Spectator started me thinking.
…there are consequences from severing rights from individuals and attaching them to groups. If groups can transfer benefits to their members, they can also transfer debits as well.
. . .
… insistence on attaching rights to the identity-group means detaching them from the individual. Ownership of rights collectively means that no one owns them individually. The rapid outcome, and one we are witnessing daily, is that … identity-group politics means an end to individually possessed rights.
There’s more at the link.
Given the current tension between group rights and individual rights, I thought it might be worthwhile to examine writing as a group-versus-individual craft.
- Do we write for individual readers, seeking to engage their interest?
- Do we write for members of a group, trying to appeal to the group’s interests in the hope that its members will want to read our work?
- If we write primarily for one group, are we necessarily writing off (you should pardon the expression) other groups with different interests?
- How can we write multiple-interest books for multiple groups or individuals with their own multiple interests?
I don’t know if the current plague of “wokeness” in our society has changed, or should change, the way we write: but it’s a question worth asking in these benighted times. I know that if I write my normal books, I’m going to attract one-star reviews and similar opprobrium from those who regard me as one step removed from a cross between Attila the Hun and a Neanderthal cave mother (and not much of a step at that). Does this matter? If I want to make a living as a writer, do I have to write cross-group as well as cross-genre? Will sparkles and unicorn farts make for good military science fiction or sword-and-sorcery fantasy?
Over to you, readers. What say you?