In my recent post entitled Christian Fiction: What’s Our Mission?, a multi-published author wrote in with this comment:
“This question has been raked over the coals so many times it’s all burned out.”
That post, as do many of my posts about the state of Christian Fiction, got a lot of hits, as well as 40+ comments. Which got me to thinking: Is the debate about Christian Fiction really “all burned out” or is it still relevant? Is the discussion about “edgy fiction,” message-driven art, the use of expletives, “Christian romance,” “Christian horror,” the lack of speculative fiction, the proliferation of woman’s fiction and Historicals, and the overall quality of Christian books, are these issues something we should keep addressing or just drop? Or should there be another category than just the two below? Love to hear your thoughts, pro or con. Have a great weekend!
It’s an important debate to have, I will give you that. But in the long run, people who criticize christian fiction are better off looking elsewhere than wasting their breath trying to change the industry. IMO
So maybe that’s a third category — relevant but not worth debating? It seems to me that if it’s an important debate to have, then weathering criticism, misunderstanding, and potential divisiveness is worthwhile. But your perspective is valid — why bother if the industry is entrenched?
It’s a very important debate, if for no other reason than to engage and inform young Christian writers who haven’t finished sorting these things out.
Hey, Mike
I don’t know if the question is burned out…but I know I am. I think every Christian reader/writer should ponder these issues, as they *are* very relevant. But…once you’ve done that–once you’ve examined the various viewpoints, and reached a place before God where you are at peace with your particular stance–it becomes mind-numbingly repetitious to keep re-hashing the same arguments, the same premises.
If I could use an analogy, I’ve benefited from some wonderful books on the craft of writing, and I’ve read dozens, if not hundreds. You can’t say they aren’t relevant–the information is vitally important. But…after the first couple dozen, the issues/questions start sounding all-too-familiar, and it’s rare that anyone adds something totally fresh and unique.
What percentage of Show vs Tell?…lots of description, or sparse?…Are flashbacks okay, or should they be avoided like Paris Hilton? Can (we) use (parentheses) in fiction? (not unless you’re Stephen King).
Ultimately, every writer has to sift through the issues and decide where they stand on each. If you don’t you’re paralyzed by the glut of viewpoints.
And that difference in viewpoints will never be resolved. Well-meaning people will always disagree on the “right” way. The debate does reach a point of diminishing returns, over time. A sort of “controversy-fatigue.”
So, I vote for the category of: Relevant, But Unresolvable.
Alan, as Nicole said, this is a great answer. The question I would follow with is, If the industry needs changed (this assumes a lot of things, I know), then how else will it change without dissent and debate? In other words, if people like me just leave the CBA, doesn’t that destine it to become the very thing that some Christian authors and readers despise? I know this is not an exact equivalent, but wouldn’t it be like a Christian saying, “The Church is hypocritical, unfriendly, cliquish, and not at all like Jesus. Therefore, I will (a) Leave the Church and, (b) Never rehash its problems again. Thank God that Martin Luther did not do either or else we’d still be bowing to the Pope. Thank you for your comments, Alan. I really appreciate them!
I so appreciate your insightful questions, Mike. Here’s how I’d approach your follow-up:
Starting with your premise that the Industry needs to be changed,
How do you change anyone’s attitudes/behaviors towards anything?
(very simplistically put)
a) Intimidation/Force
b) Appeal to the intellect/reason (i.e., challenge current thinking)
c) Appeal to the emotions (give them a reason to fall in love with it)
and some would add:
d) The power of Relationships/Familiarity (others would argue this is a sub-category of “c”)
“a” is obviously out, unless Speculative Christian Fiction authors take over the world.
“b” is where your concept of “dissent and debate” falls. (“Come, let us reason together.”)
“c” means stories that grab you, and don’t let go. Producing books of such quality and resonance that they can’t *not* be loved. I always like reading comments on Amazon for Christian Spec titles along the lines of: “This is not the type of book I’d usually pick up, but I really, really enjoyed it.” That makes me smile. One more person risked broadening their emotional boundaries and found something they connected with.
“d” people are more influenced by those with whom they have close relationships–someone we like/trust has more power to influence our attitudes/decisions than someone we don’t.
How do you change things without debate & dissent?
Consumers will be changed by C & D. Painstakingly, one reader at a time.
Publishers will be changed by the cold “business case” logic of B… *if* the sales numbers prove the bottom line.
Excellent response by Alan.
I think some of the debate is irrelevant even to the point where those who haven’t read any of recent CBA fiction should withhold their opinions. It has changed. Not enough perhaps, but it has changed.
The difficult part comes when debating the margin of their audience. If the CBA publishers are content with their current target audience and unwilling to appeal to those of us who champion the cause but see its stagnation, then really there is no debate. They’re the doorkeepers and if they’re satisfied with whom they’ve let in, then what’s the point about not being allowed to crash their party?
Sounds like some are talking two different motives for having the debate. One is where I, as an author, stand on the issue. How will I write my stories in light of where I think the market is or isn’t, if I really want to sell.
The other is how do we change the general trend, specifically, the CBA, to include more of what we like? While I do think these questions relevant, I’ll bet the majority of posters here are not CBA authors. So I’m not sure how much the debate itself is occurring within the CBA. Maybe it is, I simply don’t know.
But the bottom line for changing what the CBA offers in Christian fiction is going to be when presses like Marcher Lord show there is a demand and readership beyond nitch for it. When the bigger pub houses see those potential sales, they will jump on board. The restrictions they put into place is designed to protect their market which has done well for them. Those will change when they see they are losing some sales to a potential market. The tricky thing for them is avoiding the “New Coke” affect. Doing that without losing their traditional market may be risky.
So I would suggest that while I think it is certainly good to have as many of the kinds of books we like in the CBA market, on the “inside” if you will, there is plenty outside the CBA that could influence them. As a matter of fact, I think what needs to happen is a string of best sellers outside the CBA that will get them to seriously consider it. The academic debate will provide support and “cover” for such an action when and if it comes, but I doubt will cause them to move that direction in a committed way without demonstrable track record of sales. Any author who proves they can do it outside the CBA will probably find themselves with offers.
Where I stand on it all simply informs the way I write my own fiction.
I point to exhibit A: Mike Duran
Decompose has long been an outsider’s perspective on the state of Christian fiction. All of a sudden something happened – Mike is now a pubbed CBA author! An insider! Those of us writing about these issues and hashing out an opinion will someday become the next wave of CBA authors, at least some.
Yes, there is nothing new under the sun, and the points get debated again and again. But there are new people wading into this stream all the time.
I think you’ve coined my new brand, Jason: “The outsider’s insider.”
The debate may be an old one, but it’s still a good one. I’m thinking it’s more of everyone’s conscious than anything when it comes right down to it. What if we discussed the current political candidate? Do you know how sick of politics I am? Probably not, but it’s still valid.
All topics get old, but where some may be a stickler for certain issues, some may be swayed if the issue is brought about by a different person that has a different style. If the same person were to continually debate that you have to be filled with the Holy Ghost to be a Christian, then you may not be a Christian. Yet, if someone said as long as you receive Jesus as your Savior and you live by His Word you are a Christian, then they may well believe.
I also think that it boils down to those that just do not want to discuss it. Whether it be they do not believe in reading fiction or just that they are totally against Christianity, it’s going to depend on the commentator and/or the author of such.
There are so many reasons how and why the discussion remains relevant but one sticks out for me: for good or bad, “Fiction” is an integral part of our culture. I recall a recent poll that noted the seven major factors in our society that shape perceptions/opinions. In order of influence they are: TV, Movies, Music, Internet, Books, Family, and Public Policy.
Talk about a fiction addiction…
As people who live in and engage that culture, Christians should at least have a working knowledge of it so they can deal honestly and intelligently with the people around them.
Sounds terribly pessimistic but I view it as relevant but unresolvable. The very nature of the debate is very wide in scope and each of us who yearn for more breadth are yearning for different kinds of breadth. So even those who yearn for change can’t really agree.
For example, one perception, as noted in the post, is there is a glut of historicals. I love historicals, but I rarely find ones I like because the historicals published have too much romance in it or is totally romance focused.
And that’s just one example of many.
At times I get very tired of the debate–both as a reader and a commenter. Yet I have no idea how else to maintain a glimmer of hope that one day things might change.
My question is: Does debate really change anything? In another writer’s group the question came up: How can “Christian Horror” possibly ever work? But, attached to this question was something akin to: “I’m not prepared to change my mind, just want to hear what other people say in defense.” Of course, I jumped in, but why? I couldn’t change this poster’s mind.
I think Alan way up there made some great points. I agree that debate can be good–but usually not for the people doing the debating. I think to have a strong debate, you’ve got two sides who are sold that they are right. One might be dominant or whatever, but they wouldn’t be debating unless they were *convinced* of their argument. So, is debating really doing any good? I think there ARE people out there, not in the debate, who might agree with one of the arguments but never had the courage or thought to voice it before. I know *I’ve* been like that. Sometimes it’s not until I’ve heard someone defend something that I realize, “Yeah, hey, I feel that way too!”. So, I’d say debate is good for that.
But will debate change the industry? And it IS an industry. Some Christian writers might feel “called”, but I wouldn’t compare writing or CBA to the Church. It’s different. Bottom line, CBA wants to make money. As Christians, they should conduct themselves as Christians, yeah, just like any of us in our 8-5 jobs. But, at the end of the day, they’re trying to make money. Bonnet romances have proven to do that in their industry. We can picket all day long and tell them how people want something different, or how it’s unhealthy to have so many bonnet romances or whatever, but they’re not going to listen until they are proven that it will sell. How to prove that to them is another story–but I think that’s the only way any real and lasting change will happen.
I think it comes down to the work. Mike, I think you’re on the path to making real change in the CBA, but not because you write blogs that “challenge the system”, but because you write BOOKS that “challenge the system”. Online debates, no matter how many hits they get, do not make money. But, you’ve got a product with “The Resurrection” and you can say, “Hey, if you feel like I do about this topic, go support the book.” Hollywood’s not going to quit making 3D remakes until audiences stop paying money to see them. CBA is not going to publish more things “outside the box” until they think they’re gonna make a profit on it. Even then, you’re not going to please everybody even with change. I don’t know if we’re ever going to get a CBA book that has an f-bomb raid throughout (or if we should), so *somebody* is still going to think it’s not “edgy” enough.
I think the topic is very relevant and something essential that every writer has to decide on their own–just like everything else in life. And talking about it, even debating it, can be like iron sharpening iron. But I don’t know if I agree that debates alone will solve anything. I think we’ve got to put our convictions into action.
As a side note, I also think there’s a distinction between debating and arguing. I’ve been many places where it’s just back biting and pettiness and that is certainly not good for anyone or anything–especially not as people representing Christ. As worn out as I sometimes get with the issue of what the CBA does or does not publish, I’ve always respected you, Mike, for keeping things civil, thoughtful, and respectful on your blog.
I think that debate might inspire, but it’s hard work and DOING the work that makes any real difference.
I think it’s an important conversation to have because every time I’ve brought it up, I’ve had a response from people who said, “I thought I was the only one…”
While some individuals may tire of the conversation, not everyone is tuned in everywhere to the conversation. If for nothing else, it allows people to connect and know they are not alone.
In an age of blogs and social media it also gives anyone who is a gatekeeper access to what others might think. Also, it might inspire others to take this info and go somewhere with it. So while this might feel like a tired topic to some, no one really has the right in my book to tell others to be quiet about it. I am generally opposed to silencing techniques like that.
I think some of it is necessary because new writers are entering into the industry water and need to engage the topics. Some, however, remind me of junior high. Sorry, but it’s silly for grown ups to huff and puff because they can’t use the bad words they want in their stories.