Of politics and science

All characters have to have someone's opinion-- usually the author's. I think that if the opinion is part of the story, and has a relevant place in the main thesis, then you might work it in. My WIP is set near Washington DC, in 1973, and I have a secondary character who is a college student who occasionally says something about Watergate, or the war, or the Arab Embargo, which were big news events that year. One important day in the book is the day when the Watergate hearings are first televised, because the novel has a historical bent, and is centered around a historical event. I have the whole family sitting around the TV set for a minute.
I don't think just randomly talking about your politics or ideas is useful if it has nothing to do with the story. Often if a character identifies with a movement, there is some sort of charter or politics involved. Many novels pull in religious or ethical concerns, but like writing an essay, the reader needs to be given a little walk through sometimes.

Characters with opinions , yours or someone else's, is not a bad Idea, in-fact it can help to put a bit of life into a story.The early Star trek was a vehicle for Gene Roddenberry's Ideas ,but it was also entertaining.It just depends how you write it.

Ways to avoid preachiness are to 1. not have the opinionated character turn every opinion into some sort of speech; 2. have characters who hold opposing opinions or who just don't care what the opinionated character thinks; and 3. make VERY VERY VERY SURE the opinions shared by the character have some sort of bearing on the plot and/or are necessary to the story. I mean, seriously. My characters have all sorts of opinions on all sorts of things but if they have nothing to do with the story, why put them in?

There was another thread around here recently regarding coming across as "preachy" in one's stories, but I can't recall the link. Maybe someone else will provide it?

As mentioned, so long as the character's opinions are firmly grounded in the story, there is no problem. The moment you have the character step up from that grounding and onto a soapbox, you'll likely piss off at least some of readers, and maybe many of them. In fiction, the readers want a story, not a window into the mindset of the author. Obviously, there are ways to pull this off, but if your motivation is to get your personal views across in this story, you may want to consider whether your are writing the story for you or for the readers out there. It's the readers who buy your book, unless you plan to fill your trunk full of give-aways.

I found the link to the thread I mentioned...

http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120831

Hope it's useful.

Are his opinions important to the story?

Crichton couldn't have written "State of Fear" without presenting many opinions about global warming. Nor could he have written "Jurassic Park" without dicussing cloning and genetics. In neither of these books would a 3-page dissetation on abortion, the death penalty, etc been appropriate. And such a out-of-story discussion may have turned me off which, for me, means I don't buy your next books.

If I had a dime for every time Patricia Cornwell called me, begging me to come back to her books...

If you were a different person with different opinions, would you cut out the scenes where your character expresses his opinions? If you would, then you've got a problem. Your character's opinions are his opinions, not yours, even if you agree with each other. Story comes first, then your opinions. Actually your opinions have no place in the story. Show, don't tell.

Basically, as long as it's in character then you don't have a problem. The only problem would be if your character is going off about things that don't have any bearing to either the main plot or a sub plot.

I think another important thing is to make sure that not everybody that disagrees with you/your MC is a blabbering idiot. For instance, if your MC is pontificating in favor of abortion, don't have everybody else claim that they're doing God's work by bombing abortion clinics.

Like movie legend Samuel Goldwyn once said, "If you want to send a message, call Western Union."

I may be wrong, but that's what it sounds like you're trying to do. You may be much better off confining your writing to entertainment until you become a well known author, after that, you can afford to include your messages into your stories. IMHO

Much more preferable when the opinion comes out through the way the character behaves rather than a talking head moment. One particularly annoying example of this: Dennis Bock's The Ash Garden has a tendency to present an idea through its characters, and then later have those characters talk about the idea, just in case you didn't get it! Initially, I thought it was interesting that the character, a nuclear physicist, alluded to the fact that he left Nazi Germany to work on Oppenheimer's nuclear bomb in America not because he felt offended by what the Nazis were doing to the Jews and other marginalized groups, but because as a scientist he was not being provided the professional opportunities in Germany that could be matched by what was available in the U.S. Later, of course, he felt proud of his decision in that he wasn't helping the Germans to keep up the Holocaust, but that wasn't why he decided to move.

I thought that was an interesting idea, and sounded sort of true of a scientific personality, even if not exactly an honorable reason to make the decision. But THEN... later on in the story, the scientist is interviewed by a Hiroshima bomb survivor who then points out this precise fact and asks him why he didn't move to the U.S. out of protest. That whole interview scene was ridiculously preachy and tell, tell, tell without showing me anything.

If you have a strong point of view to express, great. But do it with the way you describe the environment, the way your character handles himself in a situation, etc. Don't just tell me what he believes. For example, I'd be more endeared to a character who wrinkles her face at the plate of hamburgers and nurses a growling stomach with a plate filled with salad at a family barbecue, than hear her complain about how animals are mistreated and people shouldn't eat meat. It all comes back to show don't tell.

1. Yes.

2. Yes.

Gratuitous sex = porn.
Gratuitous violence = sado-porn.
Gratuitous opinions = preachiness.

It depends. If your book feels like preaching, then it has to preach to the audience that likes your message, at the risk of alienating others.

Roddenbury succeeded because people were entertained enough to listen to the subtle inclusion of his POV.

I'd throw the book across the room if the characters didn't have opinions.

Opinions of their own, mind.