David Drake, historical accuracy, and conservative logic
Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 6:45 pm
So on something of a whim, I've been reading Old Nathan, a collection of linked stories by David Drake. It's historical fantasy, but Drake is probably better known for military SF and space opera. Other than that I know very little about him. Given the mil-SF thing and my dislike of most writing in that genre, I wasn't expecting a lot.
It's... interesting, so far. The protagonist is emphatically not a Mary Sue, and it's hard to tell where his opinions overlap Drake's. Some of said character's opinions are fairly messed up in my book; but he happens to be a settler of the Tennessee Territories shortly after the American Revolution, and not a Mary Sue... IOW, a man of his times, with the flaws of his times, and Drake seems to be a real stickler for historical accuracy. And skilled with his prose, too, which I'll admit I also wasn't expecting.
But... politics, since that's what I'm posting about. I'm not sure about Drake (though I can guess), but his character leans pretty conservative. However, he presents an interesting argument.
Basically, what's politically interesting to me about these stories is that their historical context makes it clearer to me where a socially conservative outlook comes from. In a preindustrial society, a community lives much closer to the margin - survival is a more urgent matter, and tweaking the social status quo (with who knows what results) might not be desirable. "Living in a rigid patriarchy" is pretty horrible, but it's a lot better than "dead by starvation."
Given the choice between starting a major social reform and preparing for a long hard winter, it's pretty obvious what people are going to do...
Mind, I don't think that excuses maintaining a shitty status quo today, given that we have the necessary resources to support a social change. Likewise there are limits on what I would consider acceptable even in a more marginal, preindustrial society. But it does clarify the "why" of social conservatism a bit, and makes it easier to accept as a viewpoint - even if I have to disagree most vehemently with it here and now.
...
That said, some things just don't change. The most blatantly political parts of Old Nathan are the ones where Drake lampoons bankers and the wealthy; which makes perfect sense from this standpoint, since hoarding is bad for everyone else's survival. Poor, poor plutocrats, nobody loves them.
It's... interesting, so far. The protagonist is emphatically not a Mary Sue, and it's hard to tell where his opinions overlap Drake's. Some of said character's opinions are fairly messed up in my book; but he happens to be a settler of the Tennessee Territories shortly after the American Revolution, and not a Mary Sue... IOW, a man of his times, with the flaws of his times, and Drake seems to be a real stickler for historical accuracy. And skilled with his prose, too, which I'll admit I also wasn't expecting.
But... politics, since that's what I'm posting about. I'm not sure about Drake (though I can guess), but his character leans pretty conservative. However, he presents an interesting argument.
Basically, what's politically interesting to me about these stories is that their historical context makes it clearer to me where a socially conservative outlook comes from. In a preindustrial society, a community lives much closer to the margin - survival is a more urgent matter, and tweaking the social status quo (with who knows what results) might not be desirable. "Living in a rigid patriarchy" is pretty horrible, but it's a lot better than "dead by starvation."
Given the choice between starting a major social reform and preparing for a long hard winter, it's pretty obvious what people are going to do...
Mind, I don't think that excuses maintaining a shitty status quo today, given that we have the necessary resources to support a social change. Likewise there are limits on what I would consider acceptable even in a more marginal, preindustrial society. But it does clarify the "why" of social conservatism a bit, and makes it easier to accept as a viewpoint - even if I have to disagree most vehemently with it here and now.
...
That said, some things just don't change. The most blatantly political parts of Old Nathan are the ones where Drake lampoons bankers and the wealthy; which makes perfect sense from this standpoint, since hoarding is bad for everyone else's survival. Poor, poor plutocrats, nobody loves them.