Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.
Episode length: 56m
Chris introduces his brand-new book, 13 Novels Conservatives Will Love (but Probably Haven’t Read). Why should conservatives—or anyone—bother reading fiction? How did Chris select the novels to write about? And which ones did he choose, anyway? The answers to these questions, and many others, are finally revealed!
Show Notes:
Chris in The Dispatch: “Why Conservatives—and Everyone Else—Should Read Novels”
Chris in The Washington Examiner: “Zora Neale Hurston and the Fate of the Black Conservative”
The Ricochet boys talk to Chris about the book: “A Novel Approach”
Opening and closing music: Brendan Benson, “Spit It Out,” used with permission from the artist.
Christopher J. Scalia
Discussion (3)
CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I really enjoyed Spark's A Far Cry From Kensington so will look for Girls of Slender Means. I tried reading The Blythedale Romance because I was interested in those Utopian communities. Also I very much enjoyed The House of Seven Gables. However I just couldn't get into it. Maybe I'll have to read Mr. Scalia's chapter and try again.
CONTRIBUTOR
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
One for thirteen. And I really don't remember much about Waverley. Figured I'd do better than that.
By the way, consider running this one through editing again. You've got a number of stops and restarts in the section where you're reading your introduction.
CONTRIBUTOR
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
One quibble: I don't count The Hobbit as a prequel because it was published before The Lord of the Rings. You're welcome to count the Silmarilion as a prequel if you like. If you're implying that the trilogy is the important bit and The Hobbit is just a kid's book, I don't think I can join you in that.
Re genre fiction more generally, I dislike categorizing it like that. I'm a big science fiction nerd, but I'll tell you right now that for the stuff to be any good it has to also cover the deep human questions you get in the more literary stuff. Take an example, Dune. It's about sandworms and knife fights and terraforming and all that, but it's also a discussion of the limits of the human mind, of the ways religion affects people, and of politics. Yes, the book is obviously science fiction, but I'd argue that a reader who turns his nose up at it because it involves space is only cheating himself.
(There is a class of Science Fiction which I think of as gadget stories, as in it mostly boils down to "Let's talk about this nifty idea that I've had!" I'd say that Ringworld is a classic example. These are great fun but I'm perfectly willing to excuse anyone from reading it if that's not what they're interested in. Err, if in that they're not interested.)
Take an example going the other way. I just finished reading The Count of Monte Cristo. It's clearly an adventure story, with a prison break and duels and buried treasure. And yet, because he's treating his subject honestly, Dumas ends up raising and addressing some of the deep questions. What's Dantes' revenge going to do to him, and how appropriate can his revenge be if he's inflicting pain on the next generation, those who had nothing to do with the wrong. Should it qualify as literary? Does the fact that nearly all of it is plausible in the real world make it more worthy of respect? I've read plenty of perfectly realistic things that nevertheless leave no lasting thoughts.
Anyway, I get that you don't have that problem generally, or even specifically in this book despite the introduction (what is a dystopia if not science fiction?). I've just got a hobby horse to ride.