In our interview, Michael Blowhard had this to say about conservatives and their temperament: “Conservatives are often practical, non-theoretical people with an aversion to flossiness and silliness. And the American literary world as it’s currently constituted is pretty damn pretentious and silly.”

My musician friend Martin has similar thoughts.  He feels a vast gulf separates the liberal and conservative mind.  He describes conservatives (again, generally) as serious in thought, and more apt to value personal responsibility and spiritual-based morality, while artists, he says, tend to have, and maybe even need to have, more lax work and personal ethics.  Creative people, he tells me, want to push the envelope, move beyond the status quo, an attitude which they tend to apply to all aspects of life.  Again, it comes down to messiness.  Conservatives don’t like a mess; liberals love ‘em.

The lifestyle of Bohemia is a prefect example – late nights, sundry substances, many partners; these and other staples are less likely to tempt the conservative temperament by definition.

But even granting that conservatives are temperamentally less inclined to participate in the Bohemian lifestyle, it is a vile (and destructive) myth that Bohemia and artistry necessarily go hand in hand.  Many writers and artists, many great writers and artists, have lived stable, relatively tranquil lives consistent with the conservative temperament. (more…)

Michael Blowhard, of 2Blowhards.com fame, describes himself as “…. a blogger who has lived and worked in the NYC arts and media worlds for 30 years, and who worked in and around the NYC trade book publishing world for 15 years.”   Surely, I surmised, this is someone who may have some answers.  Mr. Blowhard was gracious enough to answer at length a series questions via email.

Do you think that there are fewer conservatives (artistic, political, or both) in the arts generally, and literature in particular?

A two-part answer.

Part one is that I have a super-inclusive view of “culture.” We’re all immersed in culture whether we know it or not, and whether we want to be or not. We clothe ourselves, we watch TV and movies and flip through magazines, we eat, we listen to stories and jokes, we drive cars and have opinions about airports and restaurants … That’s all culture. So from that point of view we’re *all* “in the arts.”   (more…)

Big Hollywood is a unique and long needed institution – a place where conservatives can gather and talk about pop culture and entertainment, the ultimate goal being, as I understand it, to encourage conservatives to engage in the culture war through the arts.

While the best tactics to achieve this goal are open to debate, its ultimate worth and necessity are indisputable – for too long, conservatives have ceded the most influential segments of society, from academia to Hollywood, to the Left with nary a fight.  The current sorry state of our movement is in no small measure the result of this refusal to engage the battle of ideas where it impacts people the most- the culture that they absorb every day through radio, Internet, television, and movies.

The piece which will appear in eight installments, one chapter each Saturday and Sunday, over the next four weeks, however, will deal more specifically with the literary world, and the conservative’s place therein.  For contemporary literature (by which I mean drama, poetry, and written fiction) is also more or less the exclusive province of left-wing thinkers and practitioners.

Some may argue that literature these days is not nearly as influential as movies, say, or television, and therefore perhaps not as worthy of conservative efforts to engage.  On the face this is true – far more people watch Sex and the City, for example, than read The Kenyon Review.  But in a larger sense, this argument misses the point and dangerously underestimates the influence of literature as a vehicle for poisonous ideas to enter the cultural mainstream.   (more…)