From The Moral Landscape:
Consider political conservatism: this is a fairly well-defined perspective that is characterized by a general discomfort with societal change and a ready acceptance of social inequality. As simple as political conservatism is to describe, we know that it is governed by many factors. The psychologist John Jost and colleagues analyzed data from twelve countries, acquired from 23,000 subjects, and found this attitude to be correlated with dogmatism, inflexibility, death anxiety, need for closure, and anticorelated with openness to experience, cognitive complexity, self-esteem, and social stability.
How do we make theater for people with that psychological profile? Can we?
I think, to start, we should assume they don’t have that pscyhological profile, because the overall description, right or wrong, seems derogatory and condescending, and writing “for someone like that” seems likely to lead to condescending theater.
But we have evidence (if we believe the quote) that they do have that psychological profile, though they may have other demonstrable traits as well that are “positive.” And I completely disagree that writing “for someone” implies condescension. To me it implies being of service, which I’d very much like to do, no matter who my audience is.
But we have very clear evidence (if you believe the above quote, which I do) that they DO have that profile, though they may (probably) also demonstrably display other more positive traits as well.
Furthermore, I don’t agree that writing “for someone” is condescension. I think it’s being of service, and it’s what I try to do. I try to understand who I’m writing for and tell stories that speak to them/engage them. That’s all I’m asking here: what would a story designed for this audience look like? Do we even know?