Being an out atheist writer?

veinglory · Dec 19, 2006

I sometimes find myself sometime inclined not to mention I am atheist, expecially on romance oriented review and discussion sites. I know quite a few writers are 'out' Christian but it seems like that is more of the norm, so it makes very little impact on people's impression. But I suspect that some readers actually would be disinclined to read work by an atheist--or it might color how they read work such as my novella where a Catholic character reconciles his faith with his sexuality. But beng largely a writer or erotica and fantasy--that demograohic, I think, is largely indifferent or adenturous when it comes to belief issues.

I was wondering how other people think about this issue and whether it ever comes up. Does not discussing it leave people to assume we follow the normative beliefs of the area and add to the invisibility of atheism and other minority belief systems in countries like America?

Higgins · Dec 19, 2006

Uncharacterizable stuff

veinglory said:
I sometimes find myself sometime inclined not to mention I am atheist, expecially on romance oriented review and discussion sites. I know quite a few writers are 'out' Christian but it seems like that is more of the norm, so it makes very little impact on people's impression. But I suspect that some readers actually would be disinclined to read work by an atheist--or it might color how they read work such as my novella where a Catholic character reconciles his faith with his sexuality. But beng largely a writer or erotica and fantasy--that demograohic, I think, is largely indifferent or adenturous when it comes to belief issues.

I was wondering how other people think about this issue and whether it ever comes up. Does not discussing it leave people to assume we follow the normative beliefs of the area and ad to the invisibility of atheism and other minority belief systems in countries like America.

I rarely mention my steady life-long drift away from standard Christianity. It strikes me as not only being curiously dull, but relatively indescribable.
One odd thing about massively normal masses of normal institutions like Christianity is that even drifting away from the standard worldview is highly standardized, at least ideologically and in terms of imagery.

But is it? What could be less true? Isn't any drifting toward reality a drift away from ideology and its "religious" preoccupations? And doesn't that imply that no dull characterization can even begin to describe the steady replacement of poorly assembled stock figures ("Paul" "the Apostles") with a more vivid gallery of people trying to do very odd things long ago...for example?

nancy02664 · Dec 19, 2006

It's such a catch-22... Not disclosing my beliefs does indeed add to that 'invisibility,' which I can't stand. But disclosing my beliefs usually leads to personal attacks, or at least (as you mention) people treating you differently (either on-line or in real life). So you either hold your tongue and let people think you're one of them, or you speak up and blacklist yourself.

But it really only becomes an issue for me if I'm in a place where religion/beliefs are being discussed. When secular conversation morphs into people talking about their beliefs, or their churches, or their pastors, or their sins, etc., I start feeling I have a responsiblity to speak up and say, "well, from an atheist's perspective..." It makes people uncomfortable, sure--but no more uncomfortable than I am, having to sit through their church-talk.

I was just thinking about this sort of the thing the other day, actually--I was reading some reviews of Sam Harris' book (well, blurbs really -- at his website: http://www.samharris.org/) at there's one at the bottom of the page that starts:

I can’t sign my name to this blurb. As a New York Times best selling author of books about business, my career will evaporate if I endorse a book that challenges the deeply held superstitions and bigotry of the masses.

Such a sad quote--and probably true. Unless you're someone whose platform involves atheism or social issues directly, I imagine that mentioning your (non) beliefs will only hurt your writing career.

veinglory · Dec 19, 2006

But there is is this issue of invisibility or prejudice. Sometimes I want to just get on with writing. Who wants to know all about the author, after all? The major authors I have met were frankly something of a disappointment (with a few exceptions). But if an estimated 10% of Americans are atheist why is the culture so presumptive of theist belief?

Just today I bought a copy of 'The End of Faith' by Sam Harris. Is is a book about history that is heavily opinionated and suggests that religion is not a positive influence on society. I donlt believe this at all, I think religion doesn't per se make a person or a culture more of less healthy. But Harris is a good writer and I was curious. Where did I find it: 'personal development'. I queried this as although it is heavily editorialised the book is a history of religious conflict and should be in the history section. Plenty of histories with overwhelming religious bias are shelved there. I got nothing but a blank look and total disinterest from the staf member. Apparently atheist bias must be separated out?

I am blathering here a bit. I'm really not used to talking about these sorts of ideas.

Meerkat · Dec 19, 2006

I've always suspected that the vast majority of the audience does not give this distinction much thought. I was approached the other day in a parking lot and given a pamphlet from the local church. "Thanks, but you should save this for someone else," says I, "I'm a Buddhist."
She then surprised me by asking "What do you believe?"
"Many things," I said, "for example I believe Jesus was born and existed, was disappointed by how the people all around were behaving, set a better example for them, was enlightened--so much so that he became God."
"Oh," she said, "then... what do I believe?"
"That He was born that way. Minor detail, don't you think?"

This is a great thread you started, by the way.

veinglory · Dec 19, 2006

I think you give a great example about how these difference can be very unimportant. But do they need to go through a period of being important to be healthily unimportant?

For example many people seem to assume atheists have no reason to be moral, they are unhappy people without clearly thought out beliefs and so on. Now a fairly breif conversation normally clears that away for individuals and then I move from being assumed to agree with their faith to being accepted as having my own (in most cases).

American society has, for the most part, accepted the equal worth of races, genders and sexualities only through a minority pride or rights period. With there ever be an atheist pride movement, I don't think so. I wouldn't go around with a placard about it perhaps because ... I'm not sure why, actually.

Meerkat · Dec 19, 2006

veinglory said:
... they need to go through a period of being important to be healthily unimportant.

.

Your entire message and not just your quote above was so insightful that you could base an entire book on your thoughts here. Well thought out, well spoken!

Jamesaritchie · Dec 19, 2006

writers

I'd say athiest writers don't have a prayer of success. Sorry, couldn't resist.

Be, really, anytime you view is in the tiny minority, of course it's going to make a difference. And it should.

veinglory · Dec 19, 2006

A difference if it is an 'out' perspective (atheist can, of course, 'pass'), sure--but a detriment? I mean Richard Dawkin must have made a bit off his books which are all about his very specific take on that minority perspective. Just as Octavia Butler's work was to some extent 'about' being black and it was still highly respected and widely read.

As for, 'should', out of context that's a little cryptic.

Higgins · Dec 19, 2006

but we all

Jamesaritchie said:
I'd say athiest writers don't have a prayer of success. Sorry, couldn't resist.

Be, really, anytime you view is in the tiny minority, of course it's going to make a difference. And it should.

The odd thing is that the views differ about things that cannot be seen, known in any detail or even defined clearly... the name of the view is all that there is....its not even a real ideological difference...its purely nominal.

Even a phenomenologist and an analytic philosopher have "views" that actually differ more than those of a Big Christian Christian and a not so Christian Christian.

Vincent · Dec 19, 2006

Well, it doesn't seem to be as much of an issue down here in Australia. We don't really have your puritanical/witch burning heritage. Yes, I suppose I'd call myself an atheist, but I'm not militant about it, and the topic rarely ever comes up.

veinglory · Dec 19, 2006

Australia is, in my experience, a pretty secular country. I remember what happened when the Aussie philosopher Peter Singer moved to the US. He was causing religiously based protests by the end of the year. (A comment about bestiality was the final straw, in Aus it would be a cause for jokes not picket lines).

victoriastrauss · Dec 30, 2006

veinglory said:
I was wondering how other people think about this issue and whether it ever comes up. Does not discussing it leave people to assume we follow the normative beliefs of the area and add to the invisibility of atheism and other minority belief systems in countries like America?

I live most of my life without ever discussing my beliefs, or lack of them, and I don't have a problem with that. Nor do I worry about whether a religious person will think that I'm immoral, or whatever, just because I don't believe in God, or whether they will view me in terms of atheist stereotypes. Who cares, really? It's their problem, not mine.

Frankly, I'm just as irritated by people who blame religion for everything from ignorance to date rape, or who condemn faith in general on the basis of wrongs done by particular religions, as I am by people who want to shove their religious convictions down my throat, so I'd really rather avoid the subject entirely unless I know I'm talking with a person who is capable of hearing what I have to say, as opposed to only being able to hear that I'm saying something that contradicts their idea of The Truth. Such discussions are pointless, anyway; it's not like either side is going to be able to change the other's viewpoint.

I guess this is another way in which I'm not properly an atheist, despite my complete and utter lack of faith of any sort: I don't feel that I'm part of any belief system to which I must declare my allegiance.

- Victoria

Sean D. Schaffer · Dec 30, 2006

I don't really know how to add to this discussion, but I think I should, if only to speak my own mind.

I personally don't mind what religion--or lack thereof--a writer has, so long as their writing is good. I never could understand why anyone would judge a writer based upon what they believe.

Of course, I know people do this. I have family members who think a writer is only good if they hold to certain beliefs about G-d, etc. Still, I never could figure out why they hold such, IMO, stupid ideals. The writing should trump everything; the author's religious beliefs should have nothing to do with whether or not a person reads their stuff.

This is not an angry post; I'm just musing about the fact people seem to think an atheist is somehow less an author because of their atheism. It bothers me to no end that people I know are like this.

Cathy C · Dec 31, 2006

This is an interesting question, vein. In my previous world, up in Colorado, the issue never came up. It was a large enough area that religion had little play in the "real world" of work and family and friends. But a few years ago, we moved, and now live in the buckle of the bible belt. There are TWENTY-FOUR churches in my town of under 5,000 (and I haven't yet heard of a mosque or temple in the region, so that says something by itself.) Here, where you go to church is a common topic, and everybody witnesses on one day of the week or another. So far, I'm new to the area, so nobody expects a firm commitment to a particular church, but one of these days, it's going to come up. Presently, I cheat (which galls me, but there you go) and tell them an evasive truth. "I was confirmed into the Lutheran church." Very true. I went until I was about sixteen when I stopped and reassessed my beliefs.

Since I ALSO write romance, it's tough . . . really tough. It's as though some people believe a person can't truly feel, or write about, love unless they're church-goers. We get a little buy since we write paranormal and most of the religious types tend to steer clear. Fortunately, my co-author IS religious, a devout Catholic, so I shunt the discussions about that to her when they come up. But it bothers me that I might lose readers if I told the truth.

And let's not even DISCUSS the fact that I don't have, or want, children.

I don't have any answers, but will be interested to see if anyone else does.

LaceWing · Dec 31, 2006

I moved to a very small town in Alabama for while some years ago, and was patient about not engaging in racist conversations with either whites or blacks (by acting like a yankee who was too dumb to get it), and up front when inevitably asked about church. No, I never had belonged to a church. Sorry, but my way was to read philosophy; and it was said with a sort of self-deprecating smile. I think my honesty carried the most weight, followed by a willingness to acknowledge the urge of religion.

The neighbors eventually accepted me as I was; one woman chose me talk to about racial problems in her family, and another chose me to talk to about her own religious doubts. Both told me they were grateful they had someone to talk to in that small town where everyone lived with the same codes from one generation to the next.

veinglory · Dec 31, 2006

It is odd to negotiate your status in a place that has strong religious (and other) norms. For a while I tried going to the Unitarian church but then I realised, hey, I don't want to--I'm not going. When it came to many norms I considered bigoted I developed the peculair habit of saying something like 'look, I don't agree. And I am saying I don't agree so you don't assume otherwise but I really don't see any point in discussing it'. If I was firm that avoided a one-against-10 debate over lunch every day but also meant I didn't get an ulcer.

nancy02664 · Dec 31, 2006

Cathy C said:
In my previous world, up in Colorado, the issue never came up. It was a large enough area that religion had little play in the "real world" of work and family and friends. But a few years ago, we moved, and now live in the buckle of the bible belt. There are TWENTY-FOUR churches in my town of under 5,000 (and I haven't yet heard of a mosque or temple in the region, so that says something by itself.) Here, where you go to church is a common topic, and everybody witnesses on one day of the week or another.

I had to chuckle when I read this, Cathy -- I'm from Massachusetts, and I live in Colorado at the moment, and I get the exact opposite impression of the state. I guess it's all relative...

Flapdoodle · Mar 6, 2007

beezle said:
Well, it doesn't seem to be as much of an issue down here in Australia. We don't really have your puritanical/witch burning heritage. Yes, I suppose I'd call myself an atheist, but I'm not militant about it, and the topic rarely ever comes up.

Not an issue in the UK either. In fact, I'd say overtly religious people (In the Christian faiths) tend to be rather quiet and guarded about their faith (And the vocal ones, those who organise protests and campaign against TV shows, are generally regarded as loonies by atheists and non-atheists). I've noticed that organisations that are religious seem to go to lengths to cover up the fact they are "religious" group in the literature they produce. As I refuse to give money to religious organisation, I check all leaflets and envelopes that come through the door. You have to read the small print.

The state church in the UK has been the butt of jokes for years ("More tea, Vicar!") and is more like a quaint historical thing that we keep around because it adds colour and the cathedrals are nice tourist attraction - sort of like the royal family. No one listens to the bishops, but sadly the church has 12 seats in the country's upper house in the parliament, something which should be abolished. Catholicism is dwindling rapidly, and a lot of prominent politicians and writers are very outspoken about keeping religion out of politics.

veinglory · Mar 6, 2007

Of course being highly religious didn't exactly hurt the British Prime Minister as far as I can see. It may be a secular society but being explicitly and overtly atheist rather than fuzzily agnostic can still cause problems.

Flapdoodle · Mar 6, 2007

veinglory said:
Of course being highly religious didn't exactly hurt the British Prime Minister as far as I can see. It may be a secular society but being explicitly and overtly atheist rather than fuzzily agnostic can still cause problems.

Blair may be religious in his private life, but he doesn't bring it into politics. And he's generally guarded when asked questions regarding faith.

scarletpeaches · Mar 6, 2007

Atheism didn't seem to do Douglas Adams' sales any harm.

Quotes like this, mentioned earlier:

I can’t sign my name to this blurb. As a New York Times best selling author of books about business, my career will evaporate if I endorse a book that challenges the deeply held superstitions and bigotry of the masses.

...are what put people off. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs but calling the 'other side' of the argument superstitious and bigoted won't advance your cause any. The beliefs don't offend me, the attitude does.

I'm a Christian but don't have a problem reading books by people who follow other religions or even no religion. Why should it? Your belief/non-belief doesn't affect your writing ability.

Flapdoodle · Mar 6, 2007

scarletpeaches said:
Atheism didn't seem to do Douglas Adams' sales any harm.

Or Richard Dawkins.

scarletpeaches · Mar 6, 2007

I chose Adams because his writing doesn't tend to concentrate on atheism - Dawkins' does. Trust me, I have a point there.

If a writer is openly atheist, and writes about atheism, then it's natural to assume their sales will be, in the main, to fellow atheists. Douglas Adams was, I'll wager, more 'mainstream'. He wrote for the masses; Christians and atheists read him (and still do).

As for Dawkins, well, he's one of those people who seems to put down the other side of the argument so I don't read him because I find him to be an utterably objectionable excuse for a human being. Hearing him speak once, he didn't put forward the argument for atheism, but actually called Christians stupid idiots who couldn't think for themselves.

Way to win the argument, Richard.

veinglory · Mar 6, 2007

Although scif fi is probably not so heavily read by the heavily religious as, say, sweet romance.

Being an out atheist writer?

volitare nequeo

Baby Name Maniac

volitare nequeo

Claims the loan was a gift

volitare nequeo

Claims the loan was a gift

volitare nequeo

Cheers

volitare nequeo

Writer Beware Goddess

Ooo! Shiny new cover!

volitare nequeo

Baby Name Maniac

volitare nequeo

volitare nequeo