Political Fictions

I had several problems with this collection of essays, but first and foremost among them was Ms. Didion's, shall we say, different writing style. [The following sentence does reflect my views but, for purposes of illustration, is written in Didion-speak:] I cannot believe that others who have read these essays have not had a similar reaction, because she seems to have an extreme aversion to periods which, when combined with her love of including multiple concepts in each sentence (often set forth by use of parenthetical footnotes or illustrations), and further combined with her EXTREME use of the passive tense--in which the main thrust of the message she was trying to convey in the given sentence is withheld until the very end of the sentence--made for numerous sentences that were virtually impossible to follow the first time through and instead required 3 and 4 re-readings, and even then were difficult to follow. If I didn't know that Ms. Didion already has an established reputation as a superb writer with, as the NYT calls it, ""ice pick/lasre beam/night scope sniper prose", I would have thought some of her writing to be simply abominable. Indeed, I felt that her reputation is so entrenched, that no editor would ever have the nerve to alter any of her writing and so what seem like random (and rambling) musings get committed to the final draft exactly as they appeared in the first draft. That is not to say that her views aren't provocative--I just wish that some of them could have been put to paper by someone else.Just by way of illustration--and believe me, I could have picked from any one of dozens and dozens of examples--consider the following sentences and see if you can fully follow them the first time through--and note that each of them is just one sentence:"This account of Mrs. Clinton's not entirely remarkable and in any case private conversations with Jean Houston appeared under the apparently accurate if unsurprsing headline "At a Difficult Time, First Lady Reaches Out, Looks Within," occupied one-hundred and fifty-four column inches, was followed by a six-column inch box explaining the rules under which Mr. woodward conducted his interviews, and included among similar revelations teh news that, according to an unidentified source (Mr. Woodward tells us that some of his interviews were on the record, others "conducted under journalistic ground rules of 'background' or 'deep background', meaning the information could be used but the sources of the information could not be identified"), Mrs. Clinton had at some unspecified point in 1995 disclosed to Jean Houston ("Dialogue and quotations come from at least one participant, from memos or from contemporaneous notes or diaries from a participant in the discussion") that "she was sure that good habits were the key to survival."Clear as can be, right? Consider this one:"The "future historian" who might be interested in piecing together the details of how the Clinton adminstration arrived at its program for health care reform, however, will find, despite a promising page of index references, that none of the key participants interviewed for The Agenda apparently thought to discuss what might have seemed the central curiosity in the process, which was by wha political miscalculation a plan initially meant to remove third-party profit from the health-care equation (or to "take on the insurance industry" as Puting People First, the manifesto of the 1992 Clinton-Gore campaign had phrased it) would become one distrusted by large numbers of Americans precisely because it seemed to enlarge and further entrench the role of the insurance industry."And finally:"The more grave misreading, as D'Souza sees it, came from within Reagan's own party, not from his more pragmatic aides (the "prags", or "ingrates and apostates", whose remarkably similar descriptions of the detachment at the center of the administration in which they served suggested to D'Souza "an almost definat loyalty") but even from his "hard-core" admirers or "true believers", those movement conservatives who considered Reagan a "malleable figurehead" too often controlled by pragmatists on his staff."I could go on and on, but you get the idea. Could these views have been expressed with any more clarity than that? Finally, I also felt that there was a certain desultory nature about the essays and they were only connected by a theme to a certain degree. On page 7, she talks about how the political process did not reflect but proceded from a series of fables about the Americna experience. And indeed, a number of the essays do address this topic. But what do her various "book reviews" such as those of books by Dinesh D'Souza, Newt Gingrich and Bob Woodward have to do with that theme. So far as I can tell, not much. In all, it's not a bad book, but I almost wish that Ms. Didion's thoughts could have been committed to paper by someone else.

Another of Didion’s winners. She surgically parses weaknesses in party platforms, and public statements of both liberals and conservatives. Then she evaluates how news media confounds public understanding even further with sound bites and analysis lacking in full understanding. In other words political platforms and announcements are transparently useless so far as public understanding and reality of derivative programs if concerned. Then made worse by cryptic news media analysis. All of this from a person having grown up in the California conservative traditions of Sacramento. She spares neither side of our disfunctional two party system. Thus on one side our political parties formulate programs flawed by misperception of real need made worse by lobbied influence weakening intended effects/affects. Her book is dated 2001 and contains vignettes from earlier decades of such as Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich. What she has to say of those times seem generally applicable to our present political environment perhaps, in my judgement, with no visible improvement in legislative programs or public debate about them. Public programs of 2008 concessions to wealth differed only in focus as well as fiscal scope and impact. Otherwise our present is a replay of such as the Gingrich contract with America or Clinton’s poverty programs ‘improvements’. One of her terse observations is illustrative of what the reader will find - “What strikes one most vividly about such a campaign is precisely its remoteness from the real life of the country.” Does this not reasonably fit many speeches in our present local and national election season? Perhaps the much broader ideological spread between Sanders, Clinton, and Trump is an exception as reflected in the party nominating conventions.

These collected essays from a couple of decades ago on political campaigns of Clinton, Gore, Dukakis, and jackson, the ascendancy of Newt Gingrich, and the foibles of assorted other Washington political types is a treasure. Joan Didion's taut phrasing, acerbic conclusions, and cerebral humor remain insightful and enlightening. Well worth the read. Vintage Didion.

Not her best work. If you like Didion go for it. I've read pretty much everything that's available by her.

The other day, I was wondering what Joan Didion thought of President Trump, but, alas, she has remained mum on the subject—and perhaps that is for the best; she’s getting on in years, and probably does not need the aggravation. Others, who like me, also wondered this mentioned that her “Political Fictions” does in fact anticipate if not depict the stage where the current political farce is being enacted.“Political Fictions” makes one overriding point, and makes it absolutely brilliantly: Our current two-party political system with its many arguments and campaigns and finger-pointing et cetera, et cetera, is little more than entertainment and something to keep the Washington crowd busy with what they do best: keeping busy, while also distracting the electorate from what they’re actually up to. Didion refers to this as “The Process.”Part and parcel of “The Process” is that politicians, vested interests, and the news media, with amazing skill and slight-of-hand, conjure up fictional realities that are then spoon fed to the populace for their entertainment.There is, she points out, a mammoth disconnect between the Beltway and the rest of the country, and she does an amazingly insightful job of proving this point.Highly recommended.

If you only know Joan Didion from 'The Year of Magical Thinking' you will find her style intact and her subjects surprising. This is a brilliant book of observations of the American 'party machines', Republican and Democrat, as they campaign or govern. Didion has a sharp eye for the contradictions, ironies and absurdities of American politics and a degree of honesty that enables her to write about exactly what she has seen and of course when she dissects some of what she has heard or read you can only marvel at the absurdities spouted on the campaign trail and the consequences of letting them go unchallenged.. Although the book was originally published in 2001 Joan Didion's essays will lead you to understand how an inexperienced but charismatic presidential candidate promising change could be elected to the highest office only to discover, as have those who voted for him, that calling for change and delivering it are to very different endeavours.

Joan Didion's Political Fictions (2001) is a collection of essays beginning in 1988-2000, ending just before the 2000 Presidential election between George Bush and Vice President Al Gore. The title of this collection is an obvious clue to Didion's “insider” view of the Washington DC political machine of both parties and the corporate media's influence on creating the right 'image' for politicians, particularly presidential candidates, that continues during their tenure in office, creating fictions and false personas. She paints an insular, self-referential, circular, and disconnected government whose only concern is getting elected and remaining in power. An image that came to mind is that of a snake swallowing its own tail.Didion spends an entire essay on Ronald Reagan and his PR team and a slew of advisers and spins doctors, painting the ex-actor as the embodiment of stalwart "leadership" and the future, and current myth man is the core representative of the Republican party. The presidents exploit San Salvador, Grenada, and the Iran/Contra scandal; we see true American imperialism at its best without any justice for what many called treason at the time. But that's the deal in Washington, pardon the previous president from crimes, so the crimes you commit will be pardoned by the next, etc.In the essays Political pornography and Clinton Agonistes, Didion focuses on the Clinton years and specifically 'Whitewater' and the Lewinsky sex scandal. This period certainly reveals the machinations of a two-party system, distracting the American people's attention from economic issues and foreign 'conflicts' to the morality of a president and the apparent moral denigration of the US people.The media on both sides of the political spectrum pounced on this sex story and drained it for all it was worth. President Clinton was known to have a voracious sexual appetite bordering on the predatory amongst insider' circles; however, it seemed the American people generally didn't care about the president's sexual activities that, for right-wing politicians, signify that the people are simple, stupid, and without moral direction. Washington turned on their constituents, which turned the country's issues from economic to cultural. It was at this time that the Neo-conservative, Christian Right moved into the halls of power. The separation of Church and State suddenly became a major debate, and bible bashing seeped into the political discourse.Didion spends a lot of time on the rise of the Christian Right. Many believe the reason was the president's actions with an intern and the many affairs in his past. The country needed to return to the basic values of 'faith' religion to "save our souls" from the sins of the democrats and any 'other' that does not believe in their evangelical doctrines. “America is God's country,” Bush would scream, where, soon, prayer meetings would immediately follow the National Security meeting with the JCOS, NSA, and the CIA.The bottom line is Washington. DC is a country in and of itself; politicians disconnected from their Constituents, and a belt-way media, a central component of The Club, who often broadcast the lies and propaganda for corporations' industrial complex.Although 20 years old, Political Fictions continues to be relevant and gives the reader insight into an ongoing broken and corrupt political system.

As a non-American, it does get a bit difficult to follow some of the details in the essays in this book, but the overall theme – of the disconnect between the political classes and the common person – is clear and continually hammered in. Skeptical to the point of cynicism but with good insights into the political process.