Yesterday I posted at the WordServe Water Cooler, a new group blog I’m involved in. The piece, How Opinionated Should a Novelist Be?, received a lot of feedback. While I refrained from making it a “Christian issue,” try as I might, I couldn’t keep it from veering into a discussion about the message and/or agenda of Christian fiction.
This discussion always seems to divide along two lines, which it did yesterday:
- Those who think Christian fiction should be defined by a clear, explicit, overt, obvious message
- Those who believe in a more subtle, nuanced, unobtrusive approach
There is no escaping the fact that message / agenda is primarily what defines contemporary Christian fiction. Literary agent Chip MacGregor recently said THIS about the difference between CBA and ABA books:
There are many similarities. Both markets want to offer good books. (I’ve never met the guy who wanted to produce or sell a bad book.) Both want to entertain in some way. Both probably intend to have most of their books foster some sort of understanding. Many people writing in CBA are largely doing so because they have a “message” they want to pass along. I meet these folks at conferences all the time – in their way of thinking, God has given them this great story, and they must be obedient and tell it to others. They have “Truth” that must be communicated. Sure, they want to be successful in the market, but even more important is the promulgation of the Gospel, and the notion of being obedient to share that message. (emphasis mine)
I happen to agree with Chip’s observation. Many CBA writers “have a message they want to pass along.” My issue is whether or not “message-driven” fiction is a good thing, and at what point promulgating a theme becomes foisting an “agenda.”
Supporters of Christian fiction often rebut the charge of having an “agenda” on the grounds that “all fiction has an agenda.” Or as Glynn put it in the comments yesterday:
I wonder though if ANY book of fiction is without agenda. Can I write ANYTHING without some sort of agenda? If I write SF or contemporary YA fiction, am I not trying “say something”? Isn’t the only difference between a book that irritates and book that makes me think how well the writer presented their viewpoint?
Glynn makes a great point, and one I pretty much agree with. Most stories have a moral, a point, or a theme, and those that don’t are little more than abstractions. (However, I think it can be argued that even abstractions are intended to evoke some sort of emotion.) I also agree with Glynn that one real difference between good and bad fiction is how the writer’s “viewpoint” or message is “presented.”
When an author’s “message” subjugates the story, co-opts characters for the purpose of delivering that message, and uses the novel as a platform for that message, at that point something’s out of whack.
Which is why this issue is so problematic for Christian writers and readers: Christian fiction MUST contain a “Christian” message.
Again, defenders of the genre will counter that all stories have a “message.” Agendas are not exclusive to Christian authors, so what’s the problem? Here’s why I think that argument fails for traction:
The “Christian message” — especially as it’s defined by CBA-style fiction — is far more monolithic than any “secular message.”
In other words, the list of “messages” that characterize Christian fiction are more narrow and exclusive than those “messages” that define general market fiction. One of the most often hailed themes of Christian fiction is… HOPE. Christian fiction must have a message of hope. Others may include specific references to Scripture, Christian characters, redemptive scenarios, and moral cleanliness. Point is: The list of “messages” that define Christian fiction is not that big.
Question: What exactly is the “message” of general market fiction?
Furthermore,
Christian readers anticipate and “look for” specific messages far more than general market readers anticipate and “look for” specific messages.
It’s as if we’re always decoding our stories. Discernment is an important part of the Christian life, so I don’t want to appear dismissive. Nevertheless, I fear Christian readers anticipate messages to our detriment. Which is one reason why Christian writers like Ted Dekker and Steven James who have crossed over into the general market are often considered to no longer be writing Christian fiction. Their “message” is too cloaked. If they even have a “Christian message” at all.
A final point. One reason Christians defend “message-driven” fiction more readily is this:
We are less critical of message-driven fiction when we agree with the message.
If the theme of a novel is to debunk global warming and climate science (see: Michael Chricton), I am far less likely to feel preached at. Why? Because I think global warming is a bit of a sham. In like manner, the reason many Christians defend Christian fiction is simply because they agree with its message.
Okay. There’s a few thoughts. I’d love to hear yours. Do you think Christian fiction is more agenda-driven than general market fiction? Do you think it should be? Or am I being totally unfair in my observations?
The sheer weight of it’s title, “Christian fiction” implies it’s more agenda-driven then adjective-less-fiction.
The purpose of your fiction, what you mean to accomplish through it, as well as your answers to broader questions like “what is art?” inform whether or not religious fiction needs to be message-driven or not. It’s my personal belief that these truths, if we really believe them, naturally inform our work, and should never dictate it.
This is an issue I’ve been struggling to figure out for a long time. On the one hand, I don’t want to pull people away from the real reality of Jesus by offering them mere entertainment and “escape”. But on the other hand, it seems too heavy handed to blatantly preach the gospel message every single time. And what if I’m writing about a fantasy world that would be ruined if I suddenly mentioned Jesus? Do I always have to have a messianic figure? But even then, such a character would be hard to relate to, because Jesus was without sin and none of us are.
I’m still conversing with Jesus himself about this, but here are a couple conclusions I’ve come to. First, I think as authors we need to ask the Lord what kind of “seeds” he wants us to plant in a story. There are times when an explicit presentation of the gospel is called for. If that’s the idea I have, I shouldn’t shy away from it. On the other hand, maybe the idea I have is simply one that will represent the way God the Father loves us, or a theme like hope. In that case I tell that story and—this is key—trust that God will take care of making the connection to himself. So it becomes not a question of what the rules are for a Christian book, but on writing out of my relationship and interaction with the Lord.
Second, I had to ask myself the question, “Does my art have value to God even if it doesn’t serve as an explicit means for advancing his kingdom?” If I am required to always have the gospel message in my writing, then my stories become just a means for Jesus to reach an end. But he cares way more about me than that. Think of a five-year old: she draws a picture of a happy family with sunny clouds and a happy dog by her side. It’s not a masterpiece, but her dad will gladly stick it on his fridge because he loves to see his daughter drawing out of the overflow of her heart. And the picture actually does have a message: love, peace, home, friendship. She didn’t mean to, but because she is loved she writes out of that overflow, and the message is inherently there. (I recently wrote about this on my blog: http://goo.gl/TZVfS)
Mike, I think this is your key statement: “When an author’s ‘message’ subjugates the story, co-opts characters for the purpose of delivering that message, and uses the novel as a platform for that message, at that point something’s out of whack.” If the natural response of the story is to explicitly reveal Jesus, then don’t back away from it. But don’t try and force the message into your characters, because it will always feel unnatural.
I feel like I’m down the rabbit hole, here. Why are people so narrow-minded? Why do we shy away from opinions that don’t please us? I look for controversy and debate and argument. I thrive on hearing opinions that don’t match with mine because the enthusiasm and mental energy of an opinionated person is contagious. I love it. I want more of it. But that’s nonfiction. It’s important to separate the art of fiction from nonfiction, though. I can guarantee that great artists with ideologies much different from mine are going to mask their opinions in the story and subtly forward those beliefs. That’s great art!
Honestly, what drives me away from blogs is the propensity to be too nice and noncontroversial. Why should I bother with this bland white-bread approach? Why should I continue reading when it’s clear the authors are 100% rule followers? My guess is their books will make me yawn, too. Okay, I’m tempted to add a lot of !!!! People are so weird to me.
Mike
I think a key to this discussion is understanding that most worldviews contain at least a part of the Truth. If that is so, then we can write stories that promote “hope” for instance without being frankly Christian. In our postmodern society, I find little hope in secular thinking. Our society is not just Godless, it is also angry, unforgiving, narcissistic, relativistic, etc, etc, yada yada yada.
Perhaps what we can do is to espouse some of the virtues of our worldview and at least “put a rock in their shoe”. Somewhere along the line, the author will have the opportunity to share where those virtues come from and then, we can reveal the origin of our Christian roots. The reader may reject us and our Christian worldview, but they have already read the book! The ideas or already there, memes, as Dawkins would call them.
Bruce, I think that IS one qualitative difference between a religious and a secular worldview: hope. While many secular books opt for happy endings, those endings don’t often flow logically in the scheme from their worldview. And I very much like your idea of “putting a rock in the reader’s shoe.”
I get what you are saying. For sure, most any novel presents some type of truth as the author sees it, even an agenda, whether hidden or not in many cases. Pullman comes to mind who had an obvious agenda for his fantasy series, which became more overt the further into the series you went. Same with Orson Scott Card, I’m told. More of his Mormon beliefs filter through in the later Ender books.
Here’s where I come down on it. The two key things to consider is audience and story. What you want to accomplish, whether you have a specific message to get across or just let out whatever comes out of you, is to have that message flow naturally from who the characters are and the plot. IOW, the message serves the story, not the story the message.
But whether it does that or not depends on audience. Yes, there are those CBA books that read very unnatural for not only non-Christians, but many Christians.
Then there are those CBA books that for the Christian audience, read quite natural. It conforms to their experiences and beliefs in how people talk and how God operates with us. But give that same book to a secular reader and they’ll feel preached at, and see it as unnatural.
Then there are those books aimed at the secular market, that while there may be a message in there, it isn’t something thats going to slap someone over the head with it.
But I think the goal, message or not, is to write what is natural for the audience you are writing for. CBA readers expect some type of message, look for something that supports their Christian beliefs, whatever the genre. They practically expect a conversion. Having a character convert is affirming to them of their position.
But even then, the hard part is to write in such a way that a conversion is natural to the person and the story, and doesn’t look like it was tacked on for the purposes of getting it there to check off a list of what will make the book acceptable for a CBA editor.
That’s the difference, I think. The CBA reader expects a message. The ABA reader does not, and when they get an overt one, Christian or not, it tends to turn them off because they read more for entertainment than to have someone try to convince them of their position.
I think is this is an important point. Do you write what God has told you to write? Do you write what you want to write? Or, do you identify an audience and write for that audience?
If I was not concerned about being published, I wouldn’t care who my audience is. But, the fact of the matter is, as published authors, we have an audience the publisher is targeting and we had better know that audience inside and out before we try to sell a book to them. And, than means, in some measure “compromising” our writing to fit that audience.
If that means scaling back the overt Christian overtones for a secular audience while preserving some kind of message or if that means putting more of the message in and weakening the story, that is the dangers of being a published author. In some ways, we sell our souls to the publisher. I’m more comfortable having sold my soul to a Christian publisher whether CBA or ABA. But, we have to know the audience and write for that audience if we want to sell our books.
Hmm, sounds a little like prostitution!
Most certainly if you are writing for a specific audience, yes, you’d better make sure what you write will speak to that audience on their own terms.
However, I don’t think the more message you have, the less well written the book is. I think one can have a strong message, but if that is integrated into a well told story, is natural to the story, and is still entertainingly done, it can still be a very engaging story. Likewise, you can have a more subtle message/theme that would not turn a secular reader away, and it wouldn’t be compromising or selling one’s soul.
I look at that as two different ministries. I happen to write for both. Though my Reality series is primarily for Christian audiences, it has some things the CBA groups would tend to not like. And the recently published space opera Mind Game is mostly entertainment, though there are some general themes that came out without me trying to insert them in. But in both cases, I felt I wrote the book God laid on my heart to write. I didn’t aim for an audience, but the book I felt God wanted me to write happened to be for two different audiences.
And my goal in doing that is to first have my Christian stories be first and foremost good and entertaining story-telling because if you don’t have that down, the message that is there isn’t going to get out much because so few will read it. Rule one for fiction is people read it to be entertained. And that isn’t all a bad thing. But if that doesn’t happen, it doesn’t matter how important of a message you have, few will see it. And it is exactly this point where much Christian fiction falls down. The author is so focused on getting the message out there that they don’t ensure the story has its own value to exist rather than being a framework to deliver a message.
Once I have great Christian stories that get across what I want to tell, via the story itself rather than anyone preaching, the more secular friendly books if done well, can attract non-Christian readers, who will then check out what else I’ve written if they like my work, and that will lead them to the more Christian oriented work. Where I hope they find the same good story-telling, but infused with Christian principles and truth. And that could plant the seeds that maybe some Christian perspectives aren’t so “crazy” or wrong sounding, and plant seeds that may blossom later as they are watered by other of God’s servants.
So while having a message may mean the story is sacrificed for it, that is not a given. You can have both. And while you may not be able to be overt about the faith to a secular audience, it does not mean you have to compromise your faith, or what God has called you to write. Such a story may be exactly what God wants you to write. Let’s not put Him in a box on how He uses what we do.
I always feel like I write what God gives me to write. What goes into it determines the audience. Which is why I’ve not worried about trying to get a CBA publisher to date, because God hasn’t given me a story that fits that market.
Great post. I am a newcomer to your blog and I enjoy it immensely.
Mike, your thoughts on the expected narrow scope of Christian fiction resonates with me, and I appreciate Jesse Koepke’s comment above as well. Romans 1:20 tells us the creation of the world reveals God’s invisible attributes, eternal power and divine nature. Does that mean every created thing has a message of hope, redemption and/or morality? Maybe in broad terms, but He’s a big God to sum up so tidily. The Gospel of Christ is God’s crucial message to mankind, but it does not seem consistent with His character to reveal that message in only one way. A God who speaks through creation, the Law, the prophets, poetry, histories, His flesh & blood Son, His Spirit, “all things” working together for good, letters, preachers, “copies of the things the heavens,” and revelatory visions (to name a few) shows us there are many ways to point to Him, if that is what writers of Christian fiction are called to do.
I just read an article about theme over at StoryFix. In part the author, Jessica Flory, said, ” working in a great theme is absolutely essential to your novel.”
It seems to me Christians are the only ones questioning whether or not we should actually say something in our fiction.
What we ought to be talking about instead is how do we say something in a way that fits naturally into the story.
Mike, I thought your ideas about narrow message are worth exploring, because I think a predictable message can be as off-putting as a predictable ending.
Becky
Becky, I’m not really questioning whether Christians should “say something in our fiction.” I agree that all stories have a theme or agenda of sorts. I am questioning our presentation and expectation of given themes, whether they are too obvious and ham-handed. And limiting. Also, I’m asking if the label itself doesn’t rightfully incite such criticism.
Thanks for your response, Mike.
While you may not be questioning the use of theme in stories, I’ve read a significant number of comments from others (not necessarily here) who do in fact disparage theme.
I am with you regarding the “presentation” of it. That’s where I think our (generic term for Christian writers) discussion should center. For a time the buzz was “improving the craft,” but that never seemed to go much beyond point of view and passive verbs.
As I said in my earlier comment, your idea that “Christian” itself narrows the number of themes is interesting, and I want to think about that some more. My instinctive reaction is, if we would write truthfully about God, then we wouldn’t find such a limited number of themes. But I want to think that out a bit.
Again, I appreciate your thoughtful post.
Becky
This is a tender subject for me because I’ve struggled with it both as a reviewer and as a writer. As a reviewer I’ve published a number of reviews on my blog and on CatholicFiction.net of Christian/Catholic-themed books. The biggest problem that I have seen time after time with Christian themed books is that: 1.) characters are too often predisposed to make speeches, and 2.) poor or absent character development.
I’ve wrote a review recently in which I made the distinction, which I hated to do, between viewing the book as a mainstream novel as opposed to a Christian novel. I felt that Christian readers would probably be more sympathetic and less critical of the novel’s blatant flaws because of the message it contained. But the truth was not one character in the book evidenced any character development at all — they all started out as nice, good, compassionate people (except for the one bad guy) and they all ended up nice, good, compassionate people (except the bad guy who ended up dead). There were a number of other flaws — long speeches, repetitive names, careless editing — but I felt the lack of character development was the most depressing because it would have completely doomed the book if it was a mainstream book.
As a writer I’ve published a novel, Each Angel Burns, with strong catholic themes, particularly the character of Father Peter Black, a devout priest, who finds himself in an impossible situation. I in no way intended that all my characters be good Christians — they were a mixed bag, some good, some flawed, a couple bad. However, when the book was reviewed on CatholicFiction.net, the reviewer chose to dwell on the adulterous relationship of two of the characters (neither of whom professed to be good Christians) and completely ignored the moral/spiritual struggle of the priest. In discussing this with those commenting on the post I realized that they were unable to distinguish between the moral behavior of the characters regardless of their overall character development.
I’m not exactly sure where I am going with all of this but I guess my point is that I, as a writer, will not sacrifice good writing and good story-telling in order to conform to genre demands even if the genre is Christian. The question is what are Christian readers more interested in — good writing and good story-telling or sensibilities that they approve of.
Thanks for letting me go on.
Kathleen, thanks for writing. Sadly, I too believe Christian readers are “more sympathetic and less critical” of their fiction because of the message it contains. We inadvertently keep the bar low by being predisposed to giving five stars to every piece of Christian fiction. It’s true that every genre has myopic fans. I would just hope that the “Christian” part of our genre would elevate it to a different level.
Great discussion, Mike.
I agree that you have to have a message or theme — that’s what makes the genre what it is, after all. But we have to do it in a way that it blends seemlessly with the story. What drives readers crazy is to be enjoying a story and then everything crashes to a halt while a sermon is dumped on them. These are the people who have given up on modern Christian fiction and only read C.S. Lewis novels.
I know many people love this book, but “Atlas Shrugged” is an extreme example — that blasted speech near the end that goes on and on and on for 40 or 50 pages. (The author’s message isn’t a spiritual message, granted, but it is a message for sure.)
I haven’t read “Atlas Shrugged,” but I’ve heard the same charge about its sermonizing. Interestingly enough, this is one of the reasons some readers like Rand — for her ideology. Thanks for commenting, Alex!
Exactly. It’s didactic disguised as dialogue. The characters, plot, and rather pedestrian writing is only a delivery platform for her ideology. And folks that agree with the ideology maintain it’s a good book. But not for the characters, plot, or writing.
It’s never ‘just a book/movie/tv show/speech’. Everything is constructed on a set of assumptions and holds forth some sort of worldview to the audience. It may be inconsistent, incomplete, inaccurate, but it’s transmitting statements that deserve, no, demand, to be weighed. Hence the constant call to all of us to be vigilant and accurately discern them.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: a novel should have substance but it isn’t a sermon. They are different creatures with different purposes. Neither is inherently superior to the other, but either can be inappropriate in context.
I think a big problem is that CBA authors try to do too much with a single book. Books are great for creating an emotional understanding of a single, specific issue. But CBA authors try to fit in way too many issues when they actually try to convert the reader. There is so much that goes into conversion, it simply cannot be done with a single, fictional, book. It’s impossible. And more than that, when you try, it shows. And that’s what we mean when we say it feels preachy. Basically, it’s trying to do too much.
CBA authors — well, all authors — would do well to keep their messages narrow and vague. Chipping away at the problem rather than taking a sledgehammer to it.
I agree with you, Tony.
I’d add that creating a compelling character that the reader loves is essential in any novel, but especially if you expect to them to follow a character’s spiritual journey. That’s not an easy sell for mainstream audiences but it can be done. But we have to present flawed characters who are capable of redemption.
“I think a big problem is that CBA authors try to do too much with a single book.”
Tony, I TOTALLY agree with this statement. It’s one of the problems defining our fiction primarily in terms of its message. So not only is it enough to infer a God, we must articulate the “Christian God” and His redemptive plan. Thus, we get cornered having to do “too much with a single book.”
Interesting thoughts and I agree to some degree. But, anyone who reads Dekker and Tosca Lee’s, Forbidden coming out in a few weeks will surely see an epic story filled with themes and message that cannot be ignored. What makes this most interesting to me is that Dekker seems to have come back to themes pretty much water downed in his last few CBA novels (not counting Immanuel’s Veins). You know I have been somewhat of a defender of CBA authors but how is it Dekker’s deepest spiritual themes have most clearly resonated since joining Hachette?
I’ve run into several authors in the CBA camp who actually think (and have said directly to me) that they have a special annointing to lead people and that is why they are published.
It’s the same ego I see in a lot of pulpit ministers and it’s something I find appalling. I can cut some room to ministers who are called to preach, but writers are called to entertain. There can be a message, of course. there’s always a message. But the difference is in how you get the message out there. If you are skilled you can be subtle. If you are not skilled you look like a pedantic a s s.
I don’t know about the special anointing business because such claims always make me a bit uneasy. It is too often used as a safety net for poor thinking and living. So on that point I full agree.
With that said, who determined the primary purpose of fiction is entertainment? Where is that set in stone? “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” was not written anywhere close to striving to be pure entertainment. “To Kill a Mockingbird” is entertaining but it is a story laden with message that one would have to wear a literary blindfold to not see.
Personally, I was called years ago to be a witness to the One has shown me grace. How that calling plays out has changed from time to time. Therefore I have never felt called to entertain. I do feel somewhat compelled to tell a story that leads people to look at what they call reality in ways they may not have before. If they are entertained in the process then I have done my job. But if they are entertained without stopping for a moment to consider something beyond the story then, for me, I have wasted my time and theirs.
While I understand what you are saying, Tim, and agree with the basic premise, I do feel that entertainment for its own sake has some value. And that is the main reason most people buy a book of fiction. Most don’t want to be preached at, they want to read a good story. And if all they get is a good story but no “message” from it, I don’t think it is necessarily a waste.
One, because we all need opportunities to escape and relax. One way is read a good story. There is value in simply being entertained. That can be, and often is by many in our society, overdone. But its abuse doesn’t mean it itself is necessarily a waste of time either for the author to write or the reader to read. It is that same attitude which makes most men prefer non-fiction, self-help books over reading a story. I know, I was there.
But a theme, message, underlying world view all play a part in most any novel. Even if the author didn’t intend it to be there. So even in the most “purely for the fun of it” stories, there will be some value communicated. And in the secular world, those values are often not supportive of Christian values. There is a place in God’s calling, I believe, to write stories that primarily are to entertain, but based upon Christian values, without ever having to mention Christ or religion or anyone getting saved, etc. That is specifically what I felt God wanted me to do, was to provide that Christian values based stories for the secular market. But the stories He’s given my brain to mull over have gone both ways.
As I’ve said and another has recently said, God calls us to different ministries, and the toe shouldn’t say to the little finger, “I don’t need you, what you do is a waste of the body’s energy.”
It isn’t an either/or proposition. Rather, God can use both types of writing.
But, if one signs on to write fiction, the first thing it has to be if it is to be read much at all, is entertaining. If you fail at that, you have failed at delivering whatever message you intended to deliver with it. And that in my mind, is the bigger waste of time for the author, if we were to measure such. It has to get read for God to use it.
You are really saying the same thing I am but in a different way. Not saying I don’t want to entertain but rather expressing my peculiar reasons for writing. If someone sees their purpose in writing as being for pure entertainment and nothing else there is nothing wrong with that. It isn’t an either/or proposition. Too bad so many try to make it one.
Yeah, I don’t know what I was thinking there with that statement. I can’t speak for other people’s call. What I should have said is that MANY writers are called to entertain.
I personally, as both a writer and a reader, think that entertainment is a worthy enough call on its own, and hard enough to fill. But again, I can’t tell anyone else what they’re called to do.
I just resent these two statements:
1. Your call is not as worthy as mine because my call is to directly preach the Gospel.
2. I am a more important person than you, with more important opinions, because I am published.
With all due respect to people that make those two statements, to say such is just plain stupid. And I hope the way I worded that was entertaining and got my message over clearly. Stupidity should get your hackles up.
This whole debate annoys me as much as worship wars. How do you engage in it without sounding prideful? I don’t know that I’ve seen anyone do it successfully.
The side who argues for subtlety criticizes the other side for being preachy or for pushing a message/agenda/whatever-you-want-t0-call-it. The side who argues that the message needs to be there ridicules the other side for hiding the truth under a bowl.
In the wide world of Christian fiction, there’s room for both. There’s an audience for both. So why debate about it? Where does it get us?
I love what Tim Downs, keynote speaker at last year’s ACFW conference said about Christian fiction. Loved it so much I stood and applauded (along with many others) when he finished.
I wrote a post about it here: http://katieganshert.blogspot.com/2010/10/what-is-christian-fiction.html
Can’t state the matter any better than you just did.
Katie, I hope I didn’t sound too “prideful” bringing this issue up 🙁 . I’m not sure that, “In the wide world of Christian fiction, there’s room for both” approaches. Frankly, mainstream Christian fiction leans much more toward “message” than not. I purchased Tim Downs’ ACFW message and agree, it’s fantastic. However, I think Downs argues more along the lines of this post. Which is one reason why he said his own church doesn’t carry his books in the bookstore. they’re not “Christian” enough. Thanks for writing, Katie!
But I like Downs’ point. He might write books that “hide the egg”, but he doesn’t question writers who write books that “put the egg on the grass”.
I think there are readers for both types of “Christian” fiction, whatever that is. One type (the one with the message on the grass) might be preaching to the choir, but you know what? The choir needs to be edified and encouraged too. The other type (the one that hides the egg) might not overtly touch on Jesus or salvation, but it can speak truth into hearts that would never set foot inside a church building.
God can use both for His glory. I don’t think there is a right or wrong here. Just a difference in taste.
Katie, I really appreciate you following up on the comments. I don’t want to belabor this or make it into something it’s not, so I’ll be brief. Christian fiction is primarily defined by its message. The further a novel gets from a “message,” the less it is defined as “Christian.” So while I agree with you, in theory, that there’s room for both, the Christian market really only caters to one.
So your beef is with the publishers of Christian fiction, not the writers? Thankfully, Christian writers can write books for the ABA. Like I said….there’s room for both. 😉
I’ll stop clogging up your comments now!
Katie, I don’t think we’re really talking about two different approaches.
One of the elements of fiction is “theme.” Doing it badly (preachy — even general market books that beat readers over the head with a secular message are called “preachy”) or leaving it out (“fiction is only entertainment”) is sloppy writing.
That might seem arrogant, but I feel like its the equivalent of saying a good car will have four tires and an engine. Well, of course, if it’s a car it has to have those things. So too with fiction. If it’s good fiction, it will have a theme. Don’t take my word for it; read the Story Fix article.
I doubt if this kind of discussion happens in predominantly secular writer forums. Apart from Christians, this just doesn’t seem to be a debate.
Becky
I’m going to have to respectfully disagree with you Becky, only because what you consider “doing it badly” and what I consider “doing it badly” is incredibly subjective. A book that might come across as preachy to you, could very well be another reader’s favorite book because it spoke to them in a way they desperately needed. So who am I to knock this book, to say it’s wrong? Who’s the authority on this? There are some readers (my sister-in-law is a great example and will readily admit this…she’s not a writer, just a reader) who looks for books with the gospel message. She wants the egg in the grass. Good for her, there are writers out there who write those kinds of books.
Recently I posed the question on my blog – what makes a book preachy? And got a whole bunch of diverse and interesting responses. Of course, nobody wants a preachy book. But what I found, after reading all the comments, is that preachiness is highly subjective. What is preachy to one is not necessarily preachy to another. http://katieganshert.blogspot.com/2011/08/preach-it-sista-or-maybe-dont.html
Katie, your post and answer here helps me understand where you’re coming from.
I guess I’m of the opinion that there really is “good writing,” that a story told well is a form of art, that art consists of both beauty and truth, and that both are fixed.
We say “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” but that’s not really true. Preference is in the eye of the beholder. I’ve never heard someone gaze up at a Redwood tree and say, “How ugly!” I’ve never heard of anyone disparaging a sunset or saying how ghastly rainbows are, or mountains, or the ocean.
Some people might prefer one over the other, but the beauty is recognizable.
Art is probably a harder subject in which to recognize beauty because of the human component. We are, as J. R. R. Tolkien said, sub-creators. We don’t do it well enough to sit back and say, “No one can improve on that.”
When it comes to books, readers are willing to overlook the warts, in part, I suppose, because all novels have them. Hence, a lot of readers, wanting a story with a theme consistent with their worldview, will overlook the preachiness.
Here’s the thing that we may be disagreeing on: preachiness and an overt Christian message are not the same thing.
In a top notch Christian fantasy (The Legend of the Firefish by George Bryan Polivka) published a few years ago, the main character is a failed seminary student. The theme of the book is the sovereignty of God. And here’s what the Publisher’s Weekly review said: “The Christian message is palpable” (i. e., not preachy).
I define “preachy” as the author writing something he wants the reader to be sure to understand. Instead, the writer should write a story with the theme woven into its fabric. It might be a pretty obvious theme, but the reader doesn’t feel “talked at.”
So that’s why I said I don’t think this is a matter of two different approaches. I think it’s a matter of one approach — write theme well. Whether the theme is overt or subtle is a different discussion. But that we should have a theme in our fiction should not be a debate, and whichever kind we decide to incorporate, the reader should still not feel preached at.
Becky
Becky – what’s your idea of preachiness? What’s the difference between preachiness and an overt Christian message? Isn’t this subjective as well? Some would say an overt Christian message IS preachy.
Katie, I went on and on in that last comment, which I’m sure is why my definition of preachy got lost: I define “preachy” as the author writing something he wants the reader to be sure to understand. Instead, the writer should write a story with the theme woven into its fabric. It might be a pretty obvious theme, but the reader doesn’t feel “talked at.”
For another Christian author’s take on theme, see Athol Dickson‘s post on the subject.
I’m working on another post on my site, too.
Becky
I think another definition of “preachy” in regards to fiction (ABA or CBA) is that “preachy” happens at every point where the novel veers away from fiction and embraces the essay. Both are art forms, but most readers of novels don’t appreciate the mix.
Sorry to keep pushing back…..but…..
If the author makes a theme obvious, how is that different from “writing something he wants the reader to be sure to understand”?
Looking forward to your post!
Sue – this definition of preachiness makes sense to me. So perhaps preachiness is stopping the natural flow of the story to sermonize. A form of info dumping or telling, instead of showing. Only with a message instead of back story.
Katie, I don’t mind at all. This is helpful, I think.
Info dump is one way a novelist can preach, but there are other ways too. You’re probably aware of the instruction that dialogue should avoid one character telling another what he already knows. This is true for a character’s thoughts too.
Unless someone has had a brain injury, people don’t usually think, I’m glad I work in such a great office building with air conditioning set at an even 72 degrees. All the people, like Joyce here, wearing that smart blue business suit, treat me like the professional I am.
Such information reads like the author wanting the reader to know where the character works, what the temp is, and what Joyce is wearing and how the employs make the POV character feel. They aren’t true pieces of the story because they aren’t natural to the way people think or talk. These lines exist for one reason only — the author wants the reader to know about the office building, the air conditioning,Joyce’s clothes, and the treatment of the MC.
Writers do the same thing with Christianity, putting truth into character’s mouths, not because these are words the character would actually say, but because the author wants the reader to hear them.
A truck driver, who has been sounding very much like a truck driver all story long, shouldn’t suddenly start sounding like a seminary grad.
That doesn’t mean the truck driver cannot talk about spiritual things, however. And when he does, what he says will be overt. Readers won’t miss it. But they will believe it is the character talking or thinking because it sounds like him and is motivated by whatever else is happening in the story.
That’s why that story I mentioned in the earlier comment didn’t receive criticism from the PW review for having such overt Christianity — a character wrestling with the sovereignty of God. The character had been in seminary. Why wouldn’t he be thinking about God? He’d been kicked out of seminary. Why wouldn’t he be trying to make sense of that failure in light of his beliefs? It was completely consistent with the character and the events, completely overt, and completely free of preaching.
Becky
I tend to agree with you in the “room for both” thing. My attitude toward much of life is very libertarian in nature.
This is where I get in trouble. Because the “other side”–in this case the “I am anointed and am here to Save The Lost”–views my ‘side’ as not just living life as another organ on the body but as someone who most probably is not truly saved.
This is where I always flinch and get defensive. And why I seem so angry when it comes up. Question anything except my relationship with my husband or my God. Those two things will net you an earful.
I know what I am about to say is going to sound utterly snobbish but here it is anyway. In the last few meetings of the local writer’s group I belong to every conversation has ultimately led to the one reason most there want to write – recognition and money. Based on that rather unscientific sampling, most could care less what anyone gets out of their story except that it liked and will lead to people buying more. Little is said about purpose or ultimate goals in writing beyond the hope of getting those words published.
Do I want to be published and paid for my efforts? Ask my creditors and they will answer in the affirmative. But it seems to me whether one is a Christian business person, writer or ditch digger there is an underlying knowledge that what we do should in some way point beyond ourselves. How that plays out is between each of us and the God we serve. Some Christians allow this to become a weight that bogs them down in morbid introspection to the point they can do nothing without turning it into a three point sermon with an invitation. Others understand that God knows their heart and motives and refuse to succumb to the tyranny of how they appear to others.
Finding the proper balance between the weight of the message and leaving the results of our lives and words to God is the key to avoiding “preachyness” in what we say and do. Then we can live and write with a message without becoming overbearing with that message.
“Some Christians allow this to become a weight that bogs them down in morbid introspection to the point they can do nothing without turning it into a three point sermon with an invitation. Others understand that God knows their heart and motives and refuse to succumb to the tyranny of how they appear to others. ”
Well said.
I think the message is more readily acknowledged in Christian fiction. I usually read secular fiction, and I rarely hear any comments on the messages contained therein—unless I’m discussing a book with Christian friends who have also read it.
Yes, I believe Christian Fiction is more Agenda-Driven than secular fiction. I’m reviewing a book now for Tyndale House and I’m Really noticing the preaching. I’m new to writing Christian Fiction, but I favor the more subtle approach.
Both approaches work in the sense that both have audiences. The problem with too blantant of a message is that to a non-Christian audience it can seemed forced or “bible-thumping.” Even to some Christians it can seemed forced. I have seen “Christian” books with the “Christian parts” thrown in almost as an afterthought just so they can be called “Christian” books. Sure, many want obviously Christian books just like they rather listen to obviously Christian music. There isn’t anything necessarily wrong with that preference. I also see plenty of secular fiction with agendas. Though many authors won’t make them quite as foundational to the story.
I think the method of allowing your beliefs inform your work and the fiction to flow from your worldview is both more natural, unforced and can get a message across just as easy, if not in a better, more intellectual way. Classic Christian authors like Tolkien or Dostoyevsky wrote this way. The Christianity is there. No, there isn’t the cliched older guy with a Bible that shows up right when he is needed. But the worldview is there and many readers will find it. Many people mistakely believe that C.S. Lewis intended to make Narnia an allegory of the Gospel, but he never set out to do that. He said, “The Lion all began with a picture of a Faun carrying an umbrella and parcels in a snowy wood.” He started with some images and let the story evolve on its own and his beliefs came through.
Many writers can attest to that moment where their story takes off like it’s alive. Those are the stories that come across natual and unfabricated. Perhaps that’s why those are often the books that endure.
Good stuff. I’m teaching a class at Colorado Christian Writer’s next month on the power of story, and I’ll be quoting you.