I just wonder how anyone manages to put politics in their writing. I try to primarily avoid it or make it seem generic instead of favoring one current political party.

I'm wondering about writing something more contemporary and fear the politics.

Two way of doing it have already been noted--the characters are talking about politics, or you're writing a political satire. But there are other ways as well.

There's a lot of politics in Heinlein's STARSHIP TROOPER simply because of the subject matter--military and war.

And there's a lot of politics in any utopian and/or distopian society story, because society is governed by politics. See, for example, 1984, BRAVE NEW WORLD, THE DISPOSSESSED.

The list can go on and on. But here's the catch--don't write a politically based story if you're not ready for, or don't want, your ideas attacked. Also, when searching for critiques, make sure you get readers who are mature enough to critique your story, not your political ideology. That's importnat.

quote:

---

Still, I don't put any of my own personal politics in a story (at least not consciously), but I do allow for my characters to have political agendas

---

Heh.. as I discovered with the first short story I submitted here for critiquing, even your characters' political beliefs will automatically be assumed to be your own by some, if not most, readers.

I quickly learned not to care about that! If I have a story to tell and it has a political angle, or one that could be interpreted as such, I will tell it regardless.

Who knows, maybe next time I'll write a tale with the opposite view! *g*

One common approach is to have the important characters be "above" partisanship, though not in the sense that politicians are always talking about (which only means that they want the other party to cooperate). Rather, the standard by which these characters judge people has to do with some core value that isn't directly related to the differences between the parties.

Earlier Clancy is both a terrible and great example. His reader-surrogate characters tend to regard things in terms of national security, patriotism, traditional morality, and other values that are very tied to the percieved differences between the parties. But at the same time, he doesn't allow his main characters to ever access that "common knowledge" and betrays expectations about party affiliation being a predictor of allegiance to them. In other words, he has his characters ignore party boundries as being superficial and unimportant, and he does the same by showing party affiliation as being more a matter of political advantage than expression of personal ethics and ideology.

Case in point, here in Utah, everyone is a Republican (well, no, but it can seem that way outside of SLC). That doesn't mean that the city councils aren't packed with big government, tax and spend socialists. It just means that they run as Republicans rather than Democrats. Most Democrats are socially/fiscally conservative individuals who are basically single issue anti-Republicans (like Card). Which is why it is considered non-wacky to register or run as Green or something like that.

The point is that political affiliations are more about getting votes than "displaying your heart on your sleeve". For all that politicians talk about how important it is to vote for their own party, it's a lot more important to get to know the individual for (or against) whom you're voting. Most readers understand this, and so usually you want to have characters that understand it as well.

Even though his stories involve a lot of politics he almost never mentions political parties. The only example I remember happens between Clear and Present Danger and The Sum of all Fears. Both Presidents are villains in one way or another, yet the President in Sum of all Fears refers to his predicessor in Clear and Present Danger as being from the "other party."