Mission statements are essential to businesses and ministries. A good mission statement can:
- Articulate goals
- Define organizational identity
- Guide strategy and decision-making
- Provide a template for critique and evaluation
- Be easily memorized and reproduced
Question: Does the Christian publishing industry have a mission statement?
I realize, in asking that question, that the Christian publishing industry is not monolithic. Nevertheless, in perusing the mission statements of Christian fiction publishers, certain concepts and aims appear consistently. They look something like this:
- To provide high quality, affordable, inspirational Christian fiction.
- To provide a safe, uplifting alternative for the entire family.
- To promote God-honoring, Christ-exalting fiction from a biblical worldview.
Those are all great aims. However, they are pretty generic (a problem with almost all mission statements). But, even more importantly, at the grassroots level they don’t seem to be “sticking.”
I recently asked this simple question on Facebook:
The single most defining characteristic of Christian fiction should be… what?
The comments were varied. Here’s a sampling of what some readers see as the defining characteristic of Christian fiction:
- “Glorifying God and enjoying him” — Stephen
- “Redemption” — Tim
- “Quality” — Dave
- “Transformation” — Susan
- “Truth” — Evan
- “A message of hope” — Mike
- “Worldview” — Cathi, “Worldview characters” — Frank
- “Christian fiction would have to be about Christ in some way” — Susan
Once again, these are all great answers. But the diversity of opinions illustrates how imprecise the label “Christian fiction” really is. Is it about hope or truth or redemption, or can it be just plain good? Is it aimed at encouraging, inspiring, convicting, proselytizing, or just entertaining? Or can Christian fiction do all of the above?
My point here is not to rehash what is or isn’t wrong with Christian publishing, but to just make a simple observation. The diversity of opinions about what Christian fiction is or should be is indicative of a potential philosophical problem.
I was recently interviewed for a website and was asked what changes I would make with the Christian publishing industry (loaded question, huh?). I answered thus:
…we need some Christian crossover imprints, titles that are aimed at seekers rather than believers. In my opinion, this is a fundamental philosophical flaw in Christian publishing. If Christians are about spreading the Good News then we are shooting ourselves in the foot by just aiming at existing believers. The Church needs two wings: a discipling wing and an evangelism wing. I think the same is true of the Christian publishing industry.
Where are our literary missionaries?
As you can see, one of my issues with our “mission”always comes back to aim: Who should Christian publishers be aiming at? Perhaps, to you, that question is too obvious — “Christian publishers need to aim at Christians, you dummy!” However, to me, that’s like saying Christian churches should only aim at the saved. Without outreach, apologetics, assimilation, and evangelism 101, churches become ingrown, stagnant, and out of touch with culture.
Suggestion: Maybe it’s time to broaden our mission statement.
Anyway, I’m interested: Do you think Christian publishers should aim at seekers and those outside our market?If so, what might that type of fiction look like? Or is it wiser, for business and ministry, to aim exclusively at believers? And if you had to write a new “mission statement” for the Christian fiction industry, what would it be?
“Anyway, I’m interested: Do you think Christian publishers should aim at seekers and those outside our market?If so, what might that type of fiction look like? Or is it wiser, for business and ministry, to aim exclusively at believers? And if you had to write a new “mission statement” for the Christian fiction industry, what would it be?”
I think evangelism in Christian fiction is necessary, Mike. However, the approach to that subject or wing of the genre is as generic and volatile as the current approach to writing for the primarily Christian audience. As you noted, the mission statements for Christian fiction cover a wide territory and pose questions even for their major audience in definition with certain novels.
I’ve learned that some readers who are very rigid in their requirements are also very loud in their objections. They’re the ones who give authors lousy Amazon reviews and question the Christianity of said authors when they decide something isn’t to their liking. They’re the ones who write the publishers and sometimes the authors with scathing criticism, complaints, and threats to never purchase another novel published by their house.
Who will dare to ignore that audience and venture into the real mission field?
Once again, Mike, true evangelism takes many steps, so your idea of evangelism in novels might mean just a suggestion of God while my idea of evangelism might mean working the whole gospel message into the story. Either way good stories can emerge with “real” characters on both sides of the fence without judgment and caricature. Actually, I like to think I write evangelically–but, hey, I’m not royalty published.
Nicole, I agree that expanding the boundaries would not be easy. However, it’s a debate worth having. Evangelism and cultural relevance have always induced controversy. The early church debated eating meat sacrificed to idols, imposing Jewish laws on new converts, and the limits of living with outsiders. How far should we go in reaching the unbelieving world? Those debates go on (or should go on) all the time in our churches, albeit with more contemporary issues. I don’t see why we should avoid those very biblical demands just because a certain demographic resists.
I don’t either, Mike. It takes vision and a willingness to put your convictions on the bottom line. Money talks, doesn’t it?
Nicole, when you say “your idea of evangelism in novels might mean just a suggestion of God while my idea of evangelism might mean working the whole gospel message into the story” I find that rather presumptive on your part.
First of all, do you really, and I mean REALLY, understand the FULL gospel? We may understand how to “get saved”, but understanding the whole gospel message and actually translating that into a story is another thing entirely.
So let’s tackle what is typically covered in novels as “the whole gospel message” then.
Are you suggesting that you would be more likely to have a character with a salvation experience so that you have put the “whole gospel message” in your novel? And when you say someone’s idea is “just a suggestion” of the gospel, are you trying to say that presenting an allegory is wrong? Who is to say that an allegory wouldn’t have a greater completion of the “whole gospel message” than a straight up telling of one character’s salvation experience?
And what about the parables of Jesus? Isn’t the whole reason we write stories as part of doing what Jesus did? When He told a parable, did he talk about the things of God so clear cut and complete? Or did He not hide it within the context of the story and dole it out bit by bit? And as not all parables He told were interpreted to us for understanding of the spiritual truths they represented, are you sure you even understand the meaning behind them? At face value, they just tell stories of common things and life lessons. A farmer sowing seed on various soil on his property, another man finding treasure in another man’s land and selling everything he has to purchase that land, a widow woman bothering a judge at his house until he grants her a hearing to settle her matter, and many, many other things. Nothing “spiritual” there, certainly no “salvation message”, but it’s the allegorical aspect where when He then starts explaining to his disciples what the stories mean that we find out the spiritual stuff, and that spiritual stuff is varied. Each parable had a completely different meaning to it. No two were quite the same. Even the similar ones had different enough meanings to them.
So, if I were you, I wouldn’t be criticizing someone for doing something that to you seems to be just “suggesting” the gospel and then turning around and thinking you understand “the whole gospel message” enough that when you show a salvation scene or have a character lay out for another character how Jesus sacrifice is the way to God that you’ve now displayed “the whole gospel message into the story”. When we rarely understand that whole message to begin with, how can one then start to compare like that?
Note: In my message here I am being quite presumptive myself in thinking that you are meaning showing “the whole gospel message” as a salvation scene or something just as blatant. If I’m wrong and that’s not what you meant, then the argument stands for those that would have thought that way.
Whoa, David.
“First of all, do you really, and I mean REALLY, understand the FULL gospel? We may understand how to “get saved”, but understanding the whole gospel message and actually translating that into a story is another thing entirely.”
Mike addressed evangelism in Christian fiction. It’s a general term in evangelism to “present the gospel” to the lost, is it not? Acts 1:8. Yes, this is the beginning of the “full gospel” which gets its boost from Acts 2:4. Most people don’t get to experience all there is within the full gospel even after entering heaven since we are incapable of the complete fullness of our Lord.
“Are you suggesting that you would be more likely to have a character with a salvation experience so that you have put the “whole gospel message” in your novel? And when you say someone’s idea is “just a suggestion” of the gospel, are you trying to say that presenting an allegory is wrong? Who is to say that an allegory wouldn’t have a greater completion of the “whole gospel message” than a straight up telling of one character’s salvation experience?”
Methodology is irrelevant. I’m saying just what you’re proving with your tone of questioning: definitions are difficult within the body of Christian writers. However an author chooses to deliver story is their directive and should they choose to evangelize in the process is a matter of that directive.
“And what about the parables of Jesus? Isn’t the whole reason we write stories as part of doing what Jesus did?”
I don’t write stories because Jesus told parables. I write stories because He’s given me that directive. Without His directive I wouldn’t have written seven novels. Apart from Him I can do nothing.
As far as how and why anyone else writes, I cannot say. We will all answer for ourselves, no one else.
“So, if I were you, I wouldn’t be criticizing someone for doing something that to you seems to be just “suggesting” the gospel and then turning around and thinking you understand “the whole gospel message” enough that when you show a salvation scene or have a character lay out for another character how Jesus sacrifice is the way to God that you’ve now displayed “the whole gospel message into the story”. When we rarely understand that whole message to begin with, how can one then start to compare like that?”
Wow, David. Honestly, I have no idea how you perceived what I wrote this way. Criticism? No way. Comparisons in thoughts/ideas between believers often occurs during these discussions with no succinct and absolute resolution. No problem there. Most of us expect that. I get fairly direct when I criticize, and this wasn’t it.
Hey, Nicole,
😀
Hope you didn’t miss where I said at the end, “Note: In my message here I am being quite presumptive myself in thinking that you are meaning showing ‘the whole gospel message’ as a salvation scene or something just as blatant. If I’m wrong and that’s not what you meant, then the argument stands for those that would have thought that way.”
If you didn’t, that’s okay, but in either case I think it’s fair to say that we both misunderstood each other. And I’m pretty direct on matters by course anyway, so I can sometimes come across more harsh than I mean to in real life the more serious I get about a topic, let alone these words with no emotion or facial expression attached to them even when I’m just joking around some times.
Take the first part. You thought I meant having some “Baptism of the Holy Spirit” experience with “Speaking in Tongues” when I emphasized the word “FULL” in “full gospel”, and perhaps I should have made the clarification because I did temporarily forget that those churches use that phrase a lot too, yet they are just as problematic in presenting the gospel as other churches, if not more so. And I for one AM Baptized in the Holy Spirit, and I DO speak in tongues, and I DON’T get those two confused as if they are the same thing. But I wasn’t referring to that when I said “full gospel”.
Rather, what I was meaning by “full gospel” is that we’re supposed to be sharing the “gospel of Jesus Christ” to the world. What we wind up doing is primarily telling about the crucifixion and resurrection over and over again to win converts, and if in the Pentecostal, Charismatic “Full Gospel” circles then promote “Baptism in the Holy Spirit” with “initial evidence” of “speaking in tongues” and then the debate on that ensues. What is rarely, if ever, taught is the ACTUAL gospel of Jesus Christ.
Jesus came here to proclaim the “good news” before His ultimate sacrifice, and He had three years to do it. He proclaimed the gospel (good news), and then became the ultimate sacrifice for all of humanity’s sin.
If we are to proclaim the gospel, then we need to be focusing on the words in red and not just on “getting people in”.
That’s what I was talking about when I said “We may understand how to ‘get saved’, but understanding the whole gospel message and actually translating that into a story is another thing entirely.”, so sorry for the confusion there on my part.
And, yes, evangelism is sharing the message, yet my further point is that once we understand the actual gospel of Jesus Christ, aren’t we sharing that if we are writing from a Christian stance to begin with? Especially if we have put spiritual elements into our novels with or without a “come to Jesus” scene thrown in?
On the second part: yes, however an author chooses IS their directive and they shouldn’t be slighted in any way because of it. My question has to do with how we show the gospel of Jesus Christ (Now that hopefully you understand what I meant by THAT a little better now 😉 ). Are you saying that unless a salvation and/or witnessing scene is shown where the salvation message (not necessarily the gospel of Jesus that He shared) is shown between two characters, that this would be your definition of putting “the whole gospel message” in your novel?
I’m just wanting to make sure I understood where you were coming from when you first said that. This is the reason for my questioning.
And you say here that “definitions are difficult” with “the body of Christian writers”, yet you had already said to Mike “your idea of evangelism in novels might mean just a suggestion of God while my idea of evangelism might mean working the whole gospel message into the story” which sounds rather defining to me, and therefore why I addressed you.
So which is it? Are you going to stick with your definitions and explain what you meant as I had asked in my first reply to you, or are you now going to back peddle with “definitions are difficult”?
Let me make this clear: I am not at all trying to start an argument with you. If you are thinking that, then please get that out of your head now. I am merely trying to bring clarification to what you have said from your initial comment that has troubled me, and with this last response, I do not feel I have an answer yet. That is why I am continuing like this. I’m your brother in Christ and I’m for you, not against you. I just want to make that clear.
And tone is subjective. You claim that I have a tone here, yet I read something in your words that suggested a “tone”, yet in reality we are only hearing things in our own heads.
For the third part, I have just heard it said so many times about doing stories is “modern day parables”, so I just was coming off of that line of reasoning when I asked about “Isn’t the whole reason we write stories as part of doing what Jesus did?” You are quite correct that every one has their own individual reason for doing this. Not all are following Jesus’ example with parables and some are just out for their own gain. Personally, I think whether we are doing it consciously or not, if we are of the Kingdom and are telling stories as part of what we do for Him, then we are following His example of parables even if we aren’t thinking about it. That’s my opinion anyway. I’m sure there are some that would disagree. 😉
But the furthering that I went into about Jesus and His parables was to illustrate how He shared the Gospel with people. He wasn’t blatant about it, he hid the truth in stories that anyone could relate to. He didn’t go into the Law and the daily temple sacrifices and all that. He just talked about ordinary people and what they did day in and day out and put them in situations that needed to be resolved. Within those stories, upon the few revelations of them that we actually have, is where He shows those closer to Him what He really meant by them. I was simply further showing how little we really portray the “full gospel” or even use the method that Jesus frequently used when He did it His own self.
And congratulations on having seven novels completed! How many are in print? I ask because I may have missed you on the shelves. Are you writing speculative as well, or are you doing some other genres?
On the final part, I took what you had said as criticism because I have heard so many slighting those that write speculative fiction with Christian themes as if they aren’t presenting the gospel in any way whatsoever – salvation scenes or not – and the way you worded that at the end just seemed like a slight to me (a “slight” slight, but a slight nevertheless 😉 ) and I didn’t like it. Again, it was a “tone” thing as you mentioned before, and as I said, “tone” is subjective, so it’s very conceivable that I misinterpreted you, and there again is why I had my final note at the end of my reply to you just in case there was a misperception on my part.
So I hope that helps you better understand where I was coming from in my reply, and I hope you now have a better grasp of what I was asking you. Again, apologies if I sounded too brash. These ARE words without “emotion” attached, and no facial expressions to look at, so it can be that much harder at times to be sure the correct message has been conveyed. Thank you for your understanding. 😀
“. . . so your idea of evangelism in novels might mean just a suggestion of God while my idea of evangelism might mean working the whole gospel message into the story.”
“Might” being the operative word (as in hypothetically), meaning the definitions aren’t clear for everyone or to everyone or by everyone, meaning “definitions are difficult within the body of Christian writers.”
I did read your final paragraph, David, but you addressed so many points, I felt I had to make clarifications.
Suffice it to say, I believe evangelism offers people the specific choice of choosing Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior or not. Getting to the place where this can be presented encompasses more methods and wonderful, inspirational, “divine appointments” than I could ever imagine.
One more clarification: I understood your reference to a full gospel, not the Pentecostal reference of the full gospel, but for me Acts 1:8 captures the essence of evangelism and Acts 2:4 is the instruction of how to do it most effectively. It certainly worked for Peter and the disciples. 😉
A crossover imprint sounds wonderful, but as Nicole said, mere mentions of “God” or “Jesus” in a book, or a hint of preaching sends general market readers in the opposite direction. It’s okay to curse Jesus but not praise him.
I’m part of a small book club of which I’d classify most members as Sunday Christians. They go to church on Sunday, but their faith doesn’t extend beyond that. When it’s my turn to choose a book, I generally pick one from the Christian market that I believe could cross over. Yet, during discussion, many of the members still complain my choice is too preachy. Books that passed their scrutiny were written by Charles Martin and Tom Davis, so there is hope.
Brenda, I wouldn’t concede that any mention of God or Christ automatically isolates some readers. Peace Like a River and Gilead for instance have received critical success and crossover appeal. The Shack, while I’d question some elements of the author’s theology, is another example of a book laden with religion that did not scare people away. There’s lots of films also that have significant Christian elements without being aimed exclusively at a niche religous market, like The Blindside. I think the issue comes down to how those religious elements are portrayed.
Mike, one thing to note about The Blindside is that it was based on a true story, so the things covered in it can be easily overlooked by critics as just an accurate representation of the small town and the people whose lives were featured in the film. One didn’t see the same sort of success in the mainstream market and audience with the fictional Facing the Giants (a similar film), even though it did quite well with Christian audiences.
A few years ago I saw that a large Christian publisher had started an imprint for Christian authors who wanted to write fiction for the secular market. It occurred to me: If I wanted to write for the secular market, why couldn’t I just get my book published by a secular publisher?
(Perhaps not surprisingly, that particular imprint is now defunct.)
Eric, many Christian writers with evangelistic aims DO choose the general market over the Christian market. Which kind of illustrates my point. It’s ironic, don’t you think, that Christians who aim at seekers are driven outside the fold? It’s like telling our missionaries if they want financial support they should look somewhere other than the Church for it. Weird.
Paul made tents to support his ministry (Acts 18:3). I don’t THINK Luke quit being a physician to write the Gospel or Peter and his brother “quit” fishing…while they followed Jesus, perhaps they caught fish to support the group? Don’t know…But I DO know lots of pastors, missionaries and preachers here, in Haiti, Liberia, Cameroon and Nigeria who work one job while ministering in their “off hours”. So…maybe not so weird?
Zondervan is preparing to attempt such a cross over with Ace Collins novel coming out the end of 2011. It will be marketed solely as a General Market novel and probably will not be shelved in the Christian fiction section. Time will tell how well this goes. B&H has future plans to try and move its Fedelis Imprint to General Fiction. Again, time will tell.
I wrote a novel about what happens when the aborted come back. (Hint: they come back angry.) I can’t conceive of any publisher in the CBA wanting to touch it, but I’m pretty sure, just from shopping, that the ABA wouldn’t balk at it if the timing was right.
The book holds life dear, has transformation and redemption, deals seriously with sin and even tackles a serious barrier to evangelism – the lure of the material world. I can’t conceive of anyone other than Christian writing it.
But it isn’t Christian fiction.
Ted Dekker sells books like he made a deal with the devil, tells inventive stories, and often engages his reader in some type of approach to philosophy or theology. But I don’t know that his stuff is any more an “evangel” than Anne Rice’s “Christ the Lord.”
I think, maybe, it has something to do with the difference between writing fiction and written evangelism. When one writes fiction the author is serving the “escape” needs/wants of the reader.
It is a suitable, noble, and difficult task, but it isn’t written evangelism, whose express purpose is to indentify the _inability_ of the reader to, ultimately, achieve true “escape” on his own merits.
But I think the key to your question lies in the exceptions to this thought:
Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged is a type of atheistic evangelical fiction. It tells a story that provides an escape for the reader, but is also a fairly dramatic expression of the “good” news that A is A.
I also think that, from a Christian perspective, Summa Elvetica is very evangelical: it is an effort not to win the souls of readers but to _redeem a fiction genre for Christ._
In other words, I think a truly evangelical horror novel would not bother trying to convert a reader, but would instead tell a riveting horror story, with all the right tropes, pacing, description, etc. The difference would be that it would not _lack_ as today’s Christless horror lacks.
It would be improved, more true, and a better story, precisely because the author has written a theme that doesn’t fall short.
Dracula is a great book, precisely because it acknowledges the power of Christ. It is Christian horror. I don’t know anyone who has ever been evangelized by Stoker’s masterpiece, but I know that it is a better book because it submits to Christ’s power and intimately understands the theological principles behind an anti-Christ.
So, I suppose the best evangelism that could come from fiction is just this: to be the best fiction in its league, and then, ON TOP OF THAT, for the novel to craftily _undermine_ the very notion that fiction that fails to acknowledge God’s sustaining power is, in any way, more realistic than fiction that bows to the maker.
I would argue that this sort of fiction: that bows in its excellence instead of telegraphing a message, has an equally good chance of being published outside the sphere of “Christian fiction” as it does within. The best writer will be subtle as serpents, so to speak.
I think that the ragged remnant of Christians who remain committed to fiction find unity in this and help to raise the standard for great stories by writing a space where God’s reality may be fully evoked.
Oh, Mike. Never one for talking about the weather, are you? Just gotta jump right into these types of discussions :p
I’m not sure I’m on board with what “Christian Fiction” should or should not be. Isn’t that what’s leading to the age-old war of CBA vs non-CBA? Like the Church, I believe there should be the discipleship wing and the “evangelical” wing, but I see too many times people arguing over which wing is “more important”.
And what’s “evangelical” anyway? This is where I find confusion. You could say that The Strange Man has an evangelical element because some dude gives a layman explanation of the gospel. People would blast that for being evangelical, but then I’ve got people telling me that the only ones who will be okay with that facet of the story will be Christians. So, I guess I fail in the “outreach” if I’m saying something about a gospel that non-believers don’t want to hear. “Preaching to the choir” or whatever.
But then, I hear of general market writers who are Christians and I’m really surprised. In reading their writing, I would never guess that were the case. Some “writers who are Christians” would say that’s the way to go–be subversive, or whatever–but if you become so sneaky that people don’t detect any spirituality at all, is that *good* evangelism? Not being snarky, I’m just sincerely uncertain.
Then, I guess you could argue, should fiction be evangelical at all? With my “layman gospel” scene, I didn’t write that hoping that someone reading at home would have a “eureka” moment (though that would be wonderful, obviously)–I wrote it because that’s where the characters are at in *their* journey. That’s what they need to survive that moment. What some people will classify as “preaching”, I intended to be “self expression”.
I’m a firm believer in personal witnessing. I actually think that Church works best as a means of discipling the saved and then sending them out to make a difference in their world. In the past, I’ve taken lost friends to church and they don’t get it. But, one-on-one, I can talk to that person and, because they know me, they might listen a little closer. I’ve seen too many revivals where people will say “Bring your lost friends! They’ll be sure to get saved!” I don’t think it’s the responsiblity of the pastor to “save” my lost friends. I don’t even think it’s mine. I think it’s the Lord’s. I’m just supposed to be available to give testimony to what the Lord did for me.
So, I think that writing fiction that you can slyly pass on to your unsuspecting lost friends in hopes they’ll read it and “get saved” doesn’t work. But, at the same time, if we’re so slick about it that they can’t detect any Christianity at all, then did we really make a difference?
Hard balance to maintain.
Greg, I really appreciate your thoughtfulness on this issue. I’m not sure I want to be counted in a war between “discipleship” and/or “evangelism,” and hope I’m not perceived as starting or furthering one. Like it or not, there are Christian readers who will ask whether or not your novel The Strange Man is “Christian” enough. All I’m suggesting is that the line we use to impose such a question is somewhat arbitrary and conditioned by multiple factors (some cultural, some biblical, some personal preference). While I agree with you that effective evangelism occurs more on a personal level than a corporate one, that still doesn’t lessen the fact that books can play a role in forming, challenging, and reinforcing someone’s worldview. Which is why C.S. Lewis famously said that an atheist cannot be too careful about what books they read.
One way to look at this paradigm of discipleship v. evangelistic type books could be the Parables of Jesus and the Sermons of the Apostles (like Peter or Paul). Sermons were direct, often leading to a “repent and believe” appeal. Jesus’ parables were less didactic and often disturbingly ambiguous. Sometimes their messages (like the Prodigal Son story) could be applied without any religious inference at all. The current configuration of the Christian market, however, seems to favor stories that are more didactic / sermon-esque than parable-like.
I personally think it’s important that Christian authors are out there writing books that have crossover appeal — even if they have no explicit Gospel message in them. We do those authors a disservice by downplaying their faith and distancing them from the “Christian” canon. Most of those authors I know are not shy about sharing their faith. They are not wishy-washy, though their stories may not be explicit. Whether or not we should call those stories “Christian” is the sticking point.
BTW, Greg, are you getting nervous? Release day is just around the corner…
Nervous? Ha! I laugh in the face of… Okay, yeah. I am :p What about you? Same day, brother!
As to your last paragraph, I agree about not abandoning those Christians who want to write “non-explicit” Christian stories for crossover appeal. I read in an earlier response of yours about how it seems that, if someone chooses to do that, they do so at the risk of not having the backing of a Christian publisher.
But my question is: Say I wanted to write something completely vague and parable-esque or something that had nothing to do with Christianity at all except for the fact that I’m writing it–if I somehow convinced a CBA publisher to publish it, would it still not be put in the Christian fiction section? That’s not rhetorical–I’m actually curious. Are we placed in the Christian fiction section because of our book’s contents, or because of our publisher?
I absolutely agree we need some crossovers out there. If nothing else than to show that Christians are not all crazy funeral-protesters. And I hope you don’t think I was doubting the faith of those general market authors who are Christians but don’t talk about it in their writing. I wasn’t looking at their lives and saying anything, just I couldn’t tell by opening up their book. Which may or may not be a good thing depending on their mission statement.
No, I didn’t think you were slamming general market authors, Greg. I just get excited like that. But about what determines the placement of a book — publisher or content — I really don’t know. Books have to be categorized. So could a Christian publisher place one of their books minus the “Christian” label for general market placement? I don’t know. Or does their insignia automatically place the book? And would that open them to charges from the Christian community that may be adverse. Another, I don’t know.
There are some successful cross-over stories already. Here are a few examples:
1) Ted Dekker – Some of his older novels are now being repackaged and sold in General Marker – Adam is one example.
2) Steven James – His Patick Bower series (Pawn, Rook,etc…) is now being sold in General Market by Penguin in a mass market size.
3) Steven Lawhead – his works often show up in both Christian and General Market sections of book stores.
All of these occurred because the authors built a loyal following and then expanded outward toward the General Market.
Tim, were those stories published by Christian publishers and then the rights re-sold? Or is this general market push strategic by Christian publishers?
In the case of Dekker and James, those titles were sold to general market publishing houses. In the case of Lawhead, Thomas Nelson has purposefully pushed his fantasy titles both directions. As I mentioned earlier, Ace Collins’ novel coming out late 2011 is being marketed solely as a general market title by Zondervan.
Isn’t the Fidelis imprint (Broadman&Holman) attempting to do this, too, Tim?
And most of Tim Downs’ books could fit in the crossover stories–certainly the Bug Man books–but they’re published by CBA publisher and placed in the Christian aisle.
B&H’s imprint, Fidelis is signing some heavy hitters such as Oliver North and several high ranking retired military figures such as retired General William G. Boykin. They are marketing to both Christian and General Market.
Evangelism in church can be so limiting. I can’t tell you how many churches I’ve been in where all I heard was the gospel message. Over and over and over again. Week after week. It’s as if the pastors forgot that lifelong Christians sat in the pews of their churches, and they were people who needed exhorting and chastising and teaching. It’s as if we’ve all forgotten that the church is not a worldly institution, but a spiritual one made up of all Christians everywhere. We need to strengthen one another, not just bring people in the fold.
Evangelism is necessary–probably one of the most needful things in the world–but it fulfills a different need. I think the same could be said of Christian publishing. As long as publishers don’t forget that Christians need exhorting, chastising, and teaching in their literature, then, yes, why not an evangelical branch?
I think that perhaps another mission of Christian fiction should be to provoke questions. All of my greatest growth as a Christian has come NOT when a minister or a book or a song has given me an answer, but rather when these vehicles provoke me to think in such a way that I hunger for an answer.
Which leads me to pose a question I’ve asked a couple ministers: as a Christian, is it wrong of me to write a story in which Christianity either doesn’t figure prominently or isn’t present at all. What if I write a story that revolves around a completely different religion. For instance, right now I’m composing a story that is based on the ancient Norse religion. Is this wrong of me? A lot of people would ask me how on earth this can possibly glorify God. Yet my view is this: while the ancient Norse religion figures prominently in the story, I’m writing this story from a Christian worldview. So my take on this story is going to be different from someone who actually practices this religion or is even friendly to it. Might this approach, then, provoke someone to ask a question that causes them to seek for answers–thereby giving God a chance to meet up with them later down the road?
Great point Nathan. I’ve always said the reason Christians should be writing quality Sci-fi is because it is a perfect stage for asking big questions. Same goes for suspense.
Nathan, please tell me when you finish this by e-mailing me at submit@beyondthecharts.com as this is exactly the kind of fiction I would be wanting to publish (even if it doesn’t have horror involved). I am very interested in seeing how this story will shape up. Even sending me your first chapters to let me see how you are coming along will be okay. You don’t know how much you just touched me there by talking about that sort of story. 😉
Great (and rather ticklish) question–thanks for making us think.
I’ve recently had to review a number of publishers, and noted that a book on one website carries this notation: “Product warning–Christian content.” Do people need to be warned about this? Talk about reverse discrimination…
When my debut novel was a free Kindle download, I got dinged repeatedly on reviews from people who were incensed to find their free book had Christian content. Then again, I’m reminded that Christ told his fishermen followers that they weren’t going to catch anything in the shallows, but when they launched out where the water was rougher, the nets were so full they broke.
I am a Christian who can’t stand Christian fiction. However, I loved “Peace Like a River,” “Gilead” and “Lying Awake” (by Mark Salzman). Give me Wendell Berry over Ted Dekker any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
I’m sorry Megan but that makes about as much as sense as saying I can’t stand general fiction. I haven’t read a large enough cross-section of general fiction to lump it all together and declare I hate all general fiction. It’s pretty doubtful most people have done the same with Christian fiction to reject it as one monolithic failure.
Ah…but therein lies the crux of the problem.
Christian fiction SHOULD be as diverse as the population of the faith itself. Yet for some reason 98.6% of Christian fiction is a homogeneous rut–an overpriced homogeneous rut at that.
I’ve been a Christian for 36 years–reading for 37 years. I can count on both hands the number of Christian fiction titles I’ve found enjoyable. Most of them were written in a different time.
I’ve read more than 350 Christian fiction titles. I’d say that qualifies as a large enough cross section.
Katharine and Megan, thank you both for commenting. I’m wondering if your dislike for Christian fiction has more to do with what you consider qualitative flaws (the writing is inferior) or philosophical flaws (agenda, predictability, preachiness, etc.). I’m genuinely interested.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. Would be interested to know what genres and publishers in the CBA you’ve read because only that would establish a cross section.
Homogeneous? – So I’m trying to discern how anyone could see the writing of Tosca Lee, Terri Blackstock, J. Mark Bertrand, Karen Kingsbury, Sibella Giorello, T.L. Hines, Mike Dellosso, Irene Hannon, and Sharon Carter Rodgers as anything approaching that criteria.
Mike, great points you make. I must admit I’ve thought long and hard about this question for many years. I addressed it 3 years ago on my blog with a pretty indepth answer:
The Purpose of Christian Books
Here is part of my post:
You might have a passion to “bring people to Christ” through your books, but I think it’s helpful to remember that “coming to Christ” is a two-step process. The first step is making the decision, which is preceded by some kind of instigating factor: conversations with a Christian, reading a book, attending a church service, whatever. The process of making the decision for Christ can take months or years, or can be practically instantaneous. But once the decision is made, obviously it’s not a “done deal.” The second step is a lifetime of pursuing Christ, developing spiritual maturity, going deeper in our faith. This is becoming a disciple. We need others to help us on this path. And this is where I believe most of the CBA books come in. Their purpose, rather than to create believers, is to disciple believers.
In my opinion, the importance of discipling believers is often underestimated. There are far too many people “making a decision for Christ” and then remaining shallow or weak in their faith for years or decades, with no one giving them direction in how to develop spiritual maturity. But this is where we can have the most impact as Christian writers.
Whether we’re writing fiction or nonfiction, our books can take people deeper into what it means to be a person of faith in Jesus Christ. Our books can disciple believers, whether those believers are newbies or have been Christians all their lives. This, I believe, is equally as important as creating believers in the first place. That’s why the CBA is so important. It disciples believers.
(Sorry this comment is so long.)
I doubt Mike minds the length of your comments as he’s had to put up with the massive length of some of mine. 😉
This question has been raked over the coals so many times it’s all burned out. Why in the world should the word “mission” be associated in any way with fiction–general or Christian? If a “mission statement” is seen as necessary for fiction, then that mission should be to tell the best story one possibly can for any reader drawn to it. To sit down with a “mission” in mind and a distinct audience when beginning to write a story seems an almost certain way to shackle the integrity and freedom and “freshness” of that story.
Speaking specifically of a *Christian* writer, his responsibility isn’t to determine the purpose or “mission” of a story, but simply to write it as best he can and allow God to use it however and for whomever He might choose.
BJ, thanks for visiting! Are you suggesting that “mission” isn’t associated with Christian fiction or shouldn’t be? I’m not sure I follow. The fact that it’s labeled “Christian” implies some type of mission, some factor that distinguishes it from other fiction, some aim over and above the general market. Thanks for commenting!
“The fact that it’s labeled “Christian” implies some type of mission, some factor that distinguishes it from other fiction, some aim over and above the general market. ”
Does it? Maybe it _should_, to some people’s minds. But I frankly think that most Christian fiction today is tailored to the specific market of women over 35 with a household income over $70K who wants a Bowdlerised version of life presented in easily-digestible petit fours of novels. You know the ones I mean. Written by authors who crank one out in 11 days, sell them in large series at $15 a pop. That is what most people think of when you say “Christian fiction”. And yes we’ve got Ted Dekkar and Robert Liparulo and a few other people who write “edgy” Diet Coke type stuff for those who want all the taste of a Stephen King or Jeffrey Deaver with non of the guilt. We even tried our hands at doing a Vampire series, thanks to the now-defrocked Eric Wilson. But it all comes down to the same thing. Despite the noble aims of the Christian author as she uses her talent to glorify God, the end concern of the market itself is not to witness or disciple but to be the alternative to mainstream fiction that many people feel is a stumbling block. Hence the widespread derision. Instead of being its own vibrant thing (think Lewis, Eliot, Bunyan) it is a pale imitation of the World.
But tell us how you really feel! :p
I can’t speak for the entire Christian Fiction market, nor do I want to–but I take a little offense at the whole idea that it’s just meant to be an alternative to mainstream fiction or an imitation of the world. That may be how some publishers/authors operate (I don’t know), but I, personally, am not writing “It’s Horror…only Christian! No sex! No violence! Safe for the whole family! Bring your kids!” If it turns out there’s no cussing in my books, it wasn’t a ploy to convince upper-middle class American White women to read my book, it’s because I didn’t put cussing in it. I reject the notion that I’m not “real horror” because it’s got a “Christian Fiction” label on the back or that I’m just some guy in a church-bubble trying to fake horror to win over the uncoverted. I’m trying to make my own “vibrant thing”, not make Steve King “without the guilt” and I know others are too.
I realize you weren’t attacking me, Katherine–you don’t even know me–but I’ve heard this from others and it just bothers me as a general statement 🙂
But maybe all this comes down to genre. Maybe I’m wrong, but it seems that “Christian Fiction” is being discussed here as a genre, lumping Amish Romance with End Times Thrillers with Dragon Fantasy. Maybe if we could start admitting that all Christian Fiction is not created equal and there are many different genres within the market and start judging those genres based on their own works and not on the Christian Fiction market as a whole. Some people like Amish Romance! People scoff at me because I’d rather watch Fright Night 2 than Inception, so who am I to judge about people’s tastes? I personally don’t go for the Amish tales. But I don’t want to judge Christian Fiction on how I might feel about that one (albeit large) section of it.
I know Jeff Gerke at Marcher Lord Press is doing an incredible job of offering Christian Fiction that’s weird–no bonnets in sight. It’s fantasy, hard sci-fi, action. When I hear Christian Fiction being labeled as inferior or imitation, I look at the struggles that Gerke and others are going through to break out of any preconceived molds of what “Christian Fiction” looks like and turn out work that stands on its own and not as “Real Fiction Lite”. It’s an uphill battle, though, because I feel that, no matter how “mold breaking” it is, people are going to flip it over and see the words “Christian Fiction” and they’re gonna roll their eyes and put it back on the shelf.
Frankly Katherine I am now doubting your objectivity. What most people think about any kind of fiction is what they happened to have actually read or at least seriously browsed through. Browsing through most of the latest Sci-fi general market I could conclude all Sci-fi is written by godless authors intent on promoting one version or another of evolutionary thought. Browsing through the general market romance section, I could conclude all such fiction is formulaic and has to include some creative euphemism for male or female body parts.
I wonder what the demographics of the Harlequin readers is?
Funny you mentioned John Bunyan. His goal was never to sell novels or crack into a certain market. He just wrote the story in his head and heart. What God did with it after than was a thing of true providence.
I’ve read. I’ve browsed. I’ve lived around books and Christians all my life so sometimes there’s an overlap. Especially when visiting my in-laws who are devoutly devoted to Karen Kingsbury and Grace Livingston Hill and those weird little romance books that come in some club where you get 3 a month. Then I’ve got friends who write horror Christian fiction (yes, published) and friends who write Sci Fi Christian fiction (not published) and friends who write Christian biographical/historical fiction. I’ve read it all.
The homogeneousness comes into play (addressing commenter above) when the author invariably wears the Message Telling as a sort of mantle of good intentions. Whether it’s an Amish* romance or a Christian Vampire or a crazed serial killer and a burnt-out cop or a community torn apart by a missing child (Daisy Chain was one of the most depressing things I’ve ever read anywhere…) it’s all the same. Everyone has to let you know that they’re there to tell you about Jesus. So they commit the cardinal sin in authorship. They stop showing and start telling. Some do less than others. But no matter who your Christian Fiction author is you can count on them telling and not showing. Always. So if you’re me you invariably get through even the most passable of stories and suddenly find yourself skimming when the author starts pounding you with their message.
I worked for a Christian publisher for many years. So I know what they want and why they want it. I know that what is going through the author’s head when the book is being written only very rarely coincides with what the publisher wants when they print it and sell it. I am also friends with a man who is an executive at another Christian publishing house and spends his days literally answering the critical mail and email from disgruntled customers. He’s lived a long and productive life, now reduced to spending eight hours a day telling this woman why that book had a character who played cards and they still saw fit to publish it. My relationship to the world of fiction, and that of Christian fiction, is no passing thing. I’m in far deeper than ‘browsing’ a section at a store.
Of course I’m a writer. I write fiction–mostly Bildungsroman/feminist/medical fiction. *I’m also a Mennonite with many ex-Amish family members. So there’s that–the galling fact that a many-layered and complex society is so continuously romanticised and reduced. And that’s ANOTHER issue I have with Christian Fiction. It’s so busy Telling instead of Showing that they don’t seem to put much effort into complexity.
I did not mention any of those authors by accident. None of them wrote for a market other than the audience they felt was likeminded enough to enjoy the story they had to tell. None of them considered a “mission statement”. They let God complete a good work that God had started in them and let the chips fall where they may.
Which brings me to the last and most troubling point for me about this whole endless dialog on this subject.
You’ll find many writers in the Christian fiction pantheon–published and unpublished alike–who exude a sense of smugness about their work. Because it has a True Message and Purpose. It’s all part of the Great Class Divide of the modern church. The war between those who work in explicitly Christian Church-related professions and those who do not. There is very often a sense of self-righteous superiority among those who (erroneously) say they are “In full-time Christian service”, implying that others who earn their paycheck elsewhere are the part-time faithful. I find that most galling of all.
I must also confess that part of my current curmudgeonliness comes from being a Kindle owner.
Various publishing houses aimed at the Christian market
Katherine, I agree with many of your concerns. And, frankly, this is the type of discussion I think could be good for Christian readers, writers, and industry execs. Although several here have mentioned how “tired” the subject is, I’m guessing the fatigue has to do with “frustration” rather than “irrelevance.” Frankly, I sense that frustration in what you have to say. Which is the point I want to make — and please correct me if I’m wrong — but your opinions seem driven more by animosity or bitterness (something like that), and your comments feel acidic. It leads to the impression that you’re just slamming an entire industry. I don’t think that’s fair.
Listen, I’ve made my share of enemies of Christian authors and readers, mostly for not letting this subject go (Dayle, can you hear me?). But one thing I try to do is stay positive and civil (not insinuating you aren’t), while being doggedly blunt about the problems I see. That doesn’t always work, of course, because some will always see any criticism of their genre as a personal indictment or a career attack. But honestly, I want Christian authors and the Christian industry to succeed, and to be what you called “its own vibrant thing.” I’m just not sure if we can get there by always being in attack mode.
Anyway, I genuinely appreciate your comments, Katherine. Grace to you!
One thing I can always count on is to find great discussions at the blog of Mike Duran. No wonder you’re number three in my Top 10 Blogs to Follow this year. 😉
I’ve stated some of my other viewpoints in responses I’ve made above, but I do want to reiterate one here in response to when you talk about crossover publishers and the market for that.
For me, my business of Beyond the Charts has always been a mainstream business that is owned by me a Believer in Christ. When I had the online store open (and when I eventually get a good website developed and launch the store again) I didn’t have a “Christian” section, and frankly, when I get to the point of having physical locations I won’t either. I think it’s dumb. It would be like having a Buddhist section of fiction or a Hindu section of fiction or etc., etc., etc.
As I move toward focusing on the publishing aspect of Beyond the Charts, I still have the same viewpoint. I will publish a mainstream story if I read it and like it and think that readers will get it. And although I want to primarily get “Christian” stuff out there too, I’m not looking for the preachy stuff. Give me an allegory such as Lord of the Rings any day over the likes of Left Behind, and that’s not to say Left Behind doesn’t have it’s place or time, but it’s just too in your face for what I would be seeking to publish. The story that Nathan mentioned above greatly intrigues me and speaks volumes to what I envision “Christian fiction” as being and would most certainly be of what I would want to publish.
Sorry if I’m at all hijacking your thread here, Mike, but you opened the door, and I want to take as much advantage as possible, so here goes:
Right now I am looking for stories mainly of the horror, suspense, and edgy variety. I’ll take any speculative fiction like sci-fi and fantasy, but my main thrust will be for the more creepy stuff. Although I am a Believer in Jesus as the Christ and would prefer things from that perspective, I’m not interested in preachy stuff and more interested in finding good stories and will publish what I find that I like and think is good. If you are interested in seeking publication with me, just e-mail me at submit@beyondthecharts.com for submission guidelines. Don’t send any of the manuscript until and unless I have told YOU to do so. Just because I told Nathan above that he could send even whatever he has right now doesn’t mean that everyone that reads this has permission to do so.
Is that the kind of crossover that you were talking about, Mike? And I hope I haven’t overstepped my welcome on the posting of this comment with the bit of ad there. 😉