Authoritarian literature

Authoritarian literature^[1] is a term used by John Gardner to designate the body of literature written by persons living under an authoritarian governmental regime. Literary works produced in these regimes share common characteristics that make the designation useful. Authoritarian regimes differ greatly in structure. In kingdoms, subjects often revere their leaders, at least publicly. Kings, or their advisors, referred to as a court, when not directly writing about a subject themselves, were the only ones who could designate, approve, and sanction writers as acceptable authorities.^[2] Government authorities also financially supported writers under a patronage system. The writers in such a system were understandably careful to ensure the composition of their work met (or would meet) the approval of authorities. Failure to comply risked official warnings, governmental sanction, or sometimes even imprisonment and loss of life.

Fiction produced under authoritarian regimes tends to be didactic. Subject matter can vary in terms of plot, but the didactic point of the work is almost always to illustrate what authorities would consider the proper comportment of individuals within the authoritarian society. This didactic point is conveyed to readers in order to idealize the existing social structure and thus, hopefully, perpetuate it. Authoritarian fiction is considered to be demonstrative in purpose rather than explorative. The author's narrative voice is also usually authoritarian in order to impart something known by the author that is presumably not known by the reader. Since most people don't enjoy the feeling of being written down to, the more successful (or popular) authors of such literature were the ones who best disguised their didactic purpose, or employed various forms of misdirection. One common way to achieve indirectness, for example, is through the use of the allegory form.