Unfortunately, we do not have the Lewises, NT Wrights, Chestertons, Dorothy Sayers or even Scott Hahns who can address the culture in general in upholding the claims of Christian dogma.
The Orthoedox writers you mention seem to, as you say, give more of a straight forward account of Orthodoxy, more valuable to other Christians who are either curious, sympathetic or wish to convert.
Of course Orthodoxy has been in survival mode for many centuries, which would have a dampening effect on producing that sort of writer. My prayer is for a robust Orthodoxy that can address the culture at large. At one time most of the heavy hitters among the thelogians of the Church were Eastern Fathers.
I think you have to be evangelistic at heart to create that genre of Christian writing. And as much as I love Orthodoxy and am thankful that I found it and converted, I do not see us being very concerned with evangelism. Our converts are mostly from other Christian communions. I still think "come and see" evangelism is something we hide behind to WAIT and see if anyone comes to check us out.
Although, I am not sure Catholics and mainline Protestants are much better at evangelism than we are. I guess the reason Evangelicals are called such is that historically, since the decline and disappearance of the great Christian cultures of Byzantium, Christian Europe and holy Russia, Evangelicals have been most willing and eager to engage pluralistic society and to win converts from among the unchurched in the general culture through campus ministries, apologetic literature, soup kitchens, drug and alcohol ministries, prison outreach, youth ministry, door-to-door "witnessing" and traditional (for them) evangelistic rallies (ala Billy Graham). That is not to say they too do not get a lot of converts from other communions, but by and large, there is a greater heart for reaching out to the general culture with the gospel among the much-maligned Evangelicals. And this is a common "genetic" trait in all "species" of Evangelicals: Willow Creek association congregations, pentecostals, mainstream evangelicals in mainline denomiations (who often have the only parishes that are actually growing in numbers, rather than declining), Emergent, Reformed, holiness/Wesleyan and even some fundamentalists.
It is ironic for us because our monasticism is extremely counter-cultural and would appeal to goths. Our worship is symbolic and therefore intuitive, with so many physical actions, sights and smells and images and would appeal to post-moderns. Our worship and dogma are ancient (also appealing to some post-moderns) and would appeal to people troubled by the shifting winds of trendiness and looking for stability. We are very sure of what we believe (hence right belief) but are very non-judgemental, preferring to see our own sinfulness and pray for others, which would provide a comfort level to seekers from among the un-churched coming out of a pluralistic culture. We are very sure of our worship (hence right worship) and therefore enjoy a liturgical experience that embodies beauty which would appeal to artists and creative types. Our rigorous asceticsim, even for non-monastics, would be appealing to athletes and "man's man" type of males. It would also appeal to those experiencing fatigue with the diminishing returns of an aquisitive materialism that fails to deliver meaning to one's striving. Our comfort level with mystery would be attractive to intellectuals turned off by easy, pat answers. Our history of cultural sensitivity in missionary work (for example in Alaska) would appeal to those critical of Christian missionary work in traditional cultures. Our tradition of prayerfulness would appeal to contemplatives. Our history of great steadfastness amidst great suffering and persecution would appeal to people seeing the American dream of opportunity and a better life for ones children slipping away as the working middle class disappears with the industrial and service jobs increasingly being exported overseas.
In short, we have a faith, practice and message that would appeal to almost everyone in our culture except to those where we live, move, work and have our being. The prosperous, upwardly-mobile middle class. Not that other Christians are not mired right within this same demographic, but maybe a "tradition" of evangelism makes some of them more willing to break out of this cocoon from time to time with a message that can communicate with other demographics in our culture. Evangelicals, because they were honest, dependable, frugal and hard-working often found themselves unintentionally within this demographic, but historically were ambivalent about it and didn't have a comfort level with "fitting in" this much. The tragedy for them is that the past two generations of Evangelicals have found a much greater comfort level and less ambivalence about fitting in.
Sadly, I think all Christians in North America could use a dose of radical and counter-cultural, including we Orthodox. Myself included.