Cordial Correspondence

TO THE OFFICE OF :
MR RAIDEN PRINCE

Mr. Prince,

Hello. Avid reader, Kip Parsons here, writing in regards to your fascinating study of magical government. I must say, I'm glad to see some modern voices adding a new perspective in the world of political discussion.

I would like to give you a hearty congratulations on a job well and thoroughly done, but cannot bring myself to do so without raising several concerns first. I expect you will have perfectly able answers however, as you proved yourself to be a clever thinker in your book, and I'm certain you will publish the corrections once you have discovered them.

Firstly, I call your book a book rather than a thesis because I found the satire somewhat contrived. Clever, yes, but we are much past the time where we must hide our opinions in stories. Fables are horribly out of fashion, don't you agree? And with criticisms so lacking in subtlety, the story does little more than distraction. However, I digress. I'm not a literary critic nor should I pretend to be one.

Secondly, your comparisons between American and British government were apt in many ways, but surely you understand that Britain now prescribes to the same tactic of spreading fear amongst the population. The latest fearmongering regarding werewolves is a blatant use of terror to try to restrain a population on the verge of rebellion.

Thirdly, I understand that you might believe that a new power, one more minded on worldly views, might be the answer, but surely you can see that it is the system that is broken, not those at the helm. We need to restructure and reorganize. Cut departments that are wasteful and divide power to prevent any sort of stagnation in an office term.

I would continue on, but I'm afraid I've begun to run out of parchment. I thank you for your time in reading this, and for your reading material. Have a productive day.

Your obliging reader,

Kipling Parsons

Mr. Parsons,

At the very outset, I offer you my heartfelt gratitude. It is rare that an author gains such an Avid Reader that he’s willing to appreciate, offer opinion and spend money on parchment (three Sickles a roll, the last I heard) all at the same time. I would say that I was flattered to hear that you thought my efforts to be ‘a job well and thoroughly done’, especially on as exhaustive a subject as politics; but I perceive you to be one among a handful who consider flattery to be the most extreme among transgressions- particularly where politics is concerned- so I’ll desist.

Now, as for your suggestions. I would certainly love to amend the book and publish corrections as you thoughtfully proposed, but since you consider the entire narrative style to be contrived and whimsical and ‘corrections’ would consist of rewriting the entire thing, I’m sure you will understand why I choose to address your concerns through quill and parchment and not a mass re-printing.

First. Yes sir, my book is not a thesis and is indeed- a book. We creative types tend to do that.

More importantly, considering my entire work was dealing with the mindsets of the common people and the way these mindsets are most delightful manipulated by politicians and their ilk; I hope you forgive me for doing a little bit of the same. I was inclined to think that the general public would be more interested in reading a political discourse disguised as an entertaining ‘story’ rather than a dry presentation of facts in essay form; the latter comes out a dime by the dozen every year and disappears in the dust of editing rooms just as easily. Not that I’m saying you’re a philistine for preferring the latter or anything. Additionally, the fact that you understood the opinions projected enough to write me six entire paragraphs about it inspite of the ‘distracting storyline’ leads me to the humble conclusion that the book’s objective was achieved.

Second. While fear has always been the the oft-resorted to tool for governments worldwide, I maintain that the British prefer the facade of ‘doing what’s best for the people’ over blatant terror regimes. With the exception of megalomaniacs, we seem to lack the stomach for it. Especially in regards to your example. It would be a little ridiculous to think that spreading fear over werewolves is a highly intelligent, elaborate tactic to get rebellious people to marry faster, wouldn’t you agree?

Third. People are governments. While I see your point about restructuring and reorganising, and couldn’t agree more about changes definitely needed in the system- a plan is only as good enough as the people executing it. Why, even monarchy gave us a lot more progress than today’s modern government when it was someone halfway competent leading it.

I wouldn’t know how productive the day’s been, but its certainly been enjoyable so far. Good day to you, Mr Parsons.

                                                                                                      Your obliged writer,
                                                                                                       Raiden Prince

TO THE OFFICE OF :
Mr. Prince,

Imagine my heartfelt surprise and pleasure at receiving a response. It is often that creative types, as you have deemed yourself, finds themselves too busy to condescend to responding to their readers. I am just as grateful for your response as you to my initial letter. And I apologize if my choice of words did not seem fitting. I just meant as thoroughly as someone could do on a topic so repeatedly touched upon. You did well bringing up many of the points others before have discussed. A great refresher course.

You’re quite correct on the matters of revisions. It seems, on the issue of the storyline, the damage is done. Perhaps the next book could be the corrected material – I’m sure your publisher would love another Prince classic.

I’m glad to have the dilemma of book versus thesis cleared up. I’ll ensure to allow the themes no further ground than that granted by the fiction of a book.

Ah, I see. You chose to, rather than set the example for how we should instead reach the common people, provide another example of the condescending art of manipulation. Very clever. A stylistic choice some might find a bit superior, but we’ll leave such analysis to the creative types. You’re correct – the objective was achieved, despite the tedious effort to ignore the plotline to get to the matters of importance. I’m certain, as you must be too, that the common folks raised on Witch Weekly gossip columns will put forth the same effort to understand the themes. Very interesting to manipulate the audience and then trust them to see beyond the manipulations. You must be very picky about your readers.

On the point of fear, I see we have a difference of opinion. I am of the school of thought that one providing ‘safety’ for another does so often by providing some line of reasoning behind the measures taken. To refrain from this courteous reasoning often unsettles the audiences and adds to the general fear, hence my own belief that fear mongering is very much alive in the United Kingdom. But perhaps you are right and the administration is just inept at playing to their own corrupted tactic. It’s hard to reconcile one ineptitude of an administration that succeeded in passing a monstrosity of a law aimed at population control.

People are indeed governments, Mr Prince. But without the right circumstances, surely Caeser, Mao, and Churchill could not have accomplished all they set to accomplish. The right sort of leader currently has no opportunity to take the position in which they might best support the country because the system does not currently support leaders who have not bought, blackmailed, or bumbled their way into the position.

I hope the enjoyment of your day continues tenfold. Mine seems to be improving by the moment.

Your gracious advocate,

Kipling Parsons