Hey folks.
I was reading an article by Jo Walton on Tor.com the other day, and it really interested me, and I wanted to get all of your opinions on this. the article was about Religious science fiction, and here's the line that got me thinking:
"There’s the kind of SF where the writer is themselves a member of some religion and this imbues their writing—I think Connie Willis would be a good example of this. Look at the stories in Miracle, or her novel Passage. I don’t have a problem with this unless it spoils the story, but I don’t find it all that interesting either."
Now, my question is this: to what extent should an author's personal life (personal history, religion, culture, personal beliefs, etc.) be evident in his/her writing?
For example, lots of people have a problem with Orson Scott Card's work because they feel his Mormon heritage is too evident in the plot and characters.
Personally, I'm not sure how I feel about this question. I don't have a problem with Card's work, but that's probably cause I'm a Mormon too so the Mormon-esque parts of his stories don't jump out at me unless I'm looking for them. C.S. Lewis was an Anglican and the Chronicles of Narnia are overtly Christian, but that never really bugged me . . . of course, I'm Christian, so maybe thats why. Is Lord of the Rings too preachy for anybody? What about Wheel of Time, or Brandon Sanderson's stuff?
I do think that in our society we try very hard not to be religously pushy . . . but if the author tries to drain his/her writing of everything that is him/her . . . well, we might as well pull a 1984 and just have machines mix and match formulaic plot devices into something new every few weeks. What's the difference?
Please, give me your opinions and what-not.
Later . . .
