Interviewer: The question of combining politics and fiction has engaged a good many critics, often drawing from them the notion that it’s very difficult to mix the two.
John Dos Passos: Well, I don’t know. Recently, I’ve been calling my novels contemporary chronicles, which seems to fit them rather better. They have a strong political bent because after all—although it isn’t the only thing—politics in our time has pushed people around more than anything else. I don’t see why dealing with politics should harm a writer at all. Despite what he said about politics in the novel being “the pistol shot at the opera,” Stendhal also wrote contemporary chronicles. Or look at Thucydides. I don’t think his history was at all damaged by the fact that he was a political writer. A lot of very good writing has been more or less involved in politics, although it’s always a dangerous territory. It’s better for some people to keep out unless they’re willing to learn how to observe. It is the occupation of a special kind of writer. His investigation—using blocks of raw experience—must be balanced. Sartre in his straight, plain reporting was wonderful. I can’t read him now. A writer in this field should be both engaged and disengaged. He must have passion and concern and anger—but he must keep his emotions at arm’s length in his work. If he doesn’t, he’s simply a propagandist, and what he offers is a “preachment.”
SpyWriter Jack King || “A new King of thrillers on the horizon” || Author of Political Thrillers || http://www.SpyWriter.com