Perhaps the most common objection to graphic elements in Christian fiction 
goes like this:
Objection: You can depict realistic characters without the gory details.
And, of course, fans of Christian fiction know exactly what those “gory details” are. Most often, they have to do with language. Occasionally sex, but mostly language. For some reason, Christian publishers tolerate violence, but not cussing. The Christian market can handle depictions of death, decapitation, drowning, and dismemberment. We just can’t handle the word “damn.” It’s too “gory.”
But there is an assumption inherent in this objection that often goes unnoticed. Which leads to this:
Response: Why do we want to?
In other words, Why do we want to depict characters without the gory details? What is compelling us to do so?
It is taken for granted that Christian fiction should be clean, family friendly, and minus the gory details. But why? I think the answers can be narrowed down to two. Either Christian readers / publishers believe the gory details are
- Wrong (as in “immoral”), or
- Unnecessary (as in “sloppy” or “lazy writing”).
If I’m not mistaken, these two are usually connected. We believe repeating / using the word “damn” is WRONG, therefore it is UNNECESSARY.
Still, this begs the question. Why are the gory details “wrong”? Why are expletives incompatible with Christian stories? And if they’re not “wrong,” per se, then why are they unnecessary?
If it simply comes down to, This is what Christian readers want (or rather, don’t want) — which is the default answer– then I revert back to the Why? Why do mainstream Christians eschew cussing in their fiction? Why is the word “damn” so “gory”? What has brought us to this point?
Either way you look at it, the objection always comes back to a Fundamentalist worldview. In this worldview, things are inherently sinful. Tobacco. Nicotine. Television. Drums. Which is why holiness, for Fundamentalists, came to be defined in terms of “negatives” — no smoking, no drinking, no movies, no makeup, no dancing, etc., etc. Much of the evangelical counter culture was rooted in this cultural separation. Christian art became an alternative to “worldly” fare. As such, it was defined as much by what it didn’t have, as what it did. That’s still true today.
Contemporary religious fiction is tethered to Fundamentalist roots. Which is why we see the word “damn” as unholy. Thus, putting it in the mouths of our characters and subjecting readers to it, is potentially… sinful.
This is the truth behind the gory details.
So just saying that we can write realistic characters without “the gory details,” begs the question. Why should we? Why should we strive to eliminate “the gory details?” Is there a moral / theological imperative? Can you really further the argument that the more expletives there are, the “sloppier” a writer is, or the less “wholesome” and/or “un-Christian” a story is? The only way this argument is sustainable is if you can establish that the word “damn” is inherently sinful.
And I don’t think you can.
I love that you posted this today. I think I’m going to go over and link back to this on my blog. I’m discussing the bikini over there. When I polled my Christian friends and readers on Facebook on whether a Christian lady can wear a bikini, they all said, “Of course.” However, put a bikini on a twenty-something missionary in fiction and my critique partners, freelance editors, contest judges all say, “Whoa, you can’t write that.” Really? But I’ve seen missionaries wear bikinis in real life. What makes fiction different?
I think you bring up a great point. Christian fiction goes back to fundamentalist roots. What this begs me to ask, then, is this: Is Christian fiction only being written for the conservative Christian? How can we ever mission to nonChristians with our writing if we are writing by these impossible-to-live-by standards?
I remember back in High School a teacher at our school (and deacon at the local Baptist Church) would say “Foot” in place of a cuss word.
I remember thinking that he was just replacing one word for another, that he was still cussing.
To me, it seems the intent behind the word is more important than the word itself.
Damn has only become “bad” because people have deemed it to be “bad”.
Likewise, if more people started using “foot” in place of damn, it too would turn into something “bad”.
As for writing cuss words, I don’t have a problem with it as long as it is not a major part of the story. Certain characters may have traits that could benefit from certain words being used, regardless if they are not acceptable among Christians. We live in a real world and our characters should reflect the world we live in.
So true! You can argue against taking the Lord’s name in vain, but cussing isn’t the same thing.
The argument that “Things cause sin” is baloney. If something entices you too much and becomes sin for you, fine; shun it, if you like. I have to watch the video games, myself, or I’ll become addicted. That doesn’t make video games inherently sinful because I am prone to addiction to them.
However, there’s also the detail that some consider such language a “stumbling block”. (To be fair, I’m a visual learner from monochromatic typed words, so I learn best from reading a typed page. If I’m exposed to a lot of foul language in my reading, I start thinking and possibly saying it—but my specific learning style is extremely rare. Can you easily read clear cursive? Then you don’t have it.)
But if that specific demographic isn’t an author’s intended audience, what’s the point of forcing him to write for it?
I don’t think cussing necessarily indicates sloppy writing—though I used to—but I do think that it’s often used sloppily. Some authors just let the chips fall where they may, announcing proudly that “The story required it!”, when they could’ve easily phrased things differently and actually strengthened the scene.
Others obviously pick the words with care, using as much insinuation as actual words so the reader picks up on the whole mood. (I love how Patricia Briggs writes Ben in her Mercedes Thompson series; he’s a foul-mouthed misogynist, and the reader hears him that way, but if you look at the words actually on the page, he actually cusses very little.)
Misti, the “stumbling block” issue is valid. My follow-up questions to those who support language-free lit would be: Are we dealing with genuine “weaker brothers” or “professional weaker brother” (aka: legalists)? Some very “mature” bellievers have constructed a religion around being offended. Must we define our stories in terms of who they should NOT offend? Why is “language” the primary stumbling block we’re worried about? Why not violence or multiculturalism? While the stumbling block objection can be valid, I tend to see it used more by established Christians, not babes in Christ.
I would say “yes”, as Christian writers, we SHOULD construct our stories so as not to offend. While you can never know or plan for everything that might offend someone (especially other Christians at every stage of their walk), but if you’re sitting at your computer and you KNOW before you type the words that something you’re about to write is likely to offend a good chunk of the readers (who the book is being marketed to), then that’s on YOU, not on the reader. If you go ahead and write it anyway, then that’s the same (for you, the writer) as inviting a known recovering alcoholic to a party you’re throwing where you’re serving free drinks. It’s easy to lump people into legalistic categories and say they’re just too uptight, and while that may be true for some (or even many), there are countless sincere believers who understand that for them and for others, allowing questionable elements into their lives is dangerous. You don’t hear the argument that often from babes in Christ, because they don’t realize the fine line they are walking and how susceptible they are to the onslaught of temptations and fuzzy moral battlegrounds. As mature Christians, WE should know perfectly well how tenuous and confusing it can be for a babe in Christ. Responsibility is on us, not them.
Too often in these debates, the predominant attitude is “Chill out, you weak, legalistic, narrow-minded Christians. Lighten up and let me write whatever I want to write and don’t complain about it, or worse yet, don’t NOT buy my books, because if you don’t buy them, then than just shows how stuck up you are. You may think you don’t want questionable elements in your Christian books, but I know what’s best for you, Christian reader, and trust me, you just need to get a little closer to the edge to expand your horizons and make it ‘real’.”
Ha, ha, ha. Victor, I hear where you’re coming from and–especially with that rant at the end–that’s often what I think of when I hear these kinds of arguments, too :p It gets frustrating.
My only “however” comes from the fact that maybe, as a writer, there are times I WANT to offend. Not to cause someone to stumble in their faith, no, but sometimes there’s something to be said for the “shock” element if you’re trying to illuminate a truth. If, for instance, someone is writing a book about a character struggling against pedophile urges, it’d be hard to write that in a way that WASN’T cringe-worthy or offensive. Just typing it here makes me get a little twitchy. Even if you cut out any cuss words, or sex or what have you, it’s just an icky topic that is going to offend–but it also happens to be a truth some struggle with. (Just for the record, I, personally, would have a hard time reading such a book, but that doesn’t necessrily mean it doesn’t have a place)
So, while I’m not of the school that thinks we should all just write willy-nilly without any regard to who we might hurt, I DO think there comes a time when we have to be honest about something–and for some people, that involves a little cussing. But then you have the whole “Well, where do you draw the line from an occasional curse word and a strafing run of F-bombs?” There have been times when a casual “damn” slips out of my characters’ mouths and I think, “Wow, that fits perfectly.” But, I end up cutting those out in my CBA stuff and, to be honest, when I go back and read it, I don’t realize it’s been cut out. Maybe, in the long run, it really was unneccesary.
Just as the argument here can often be “It takes spiritual maturity to read a book with cussing in it”, the argument can also be “It takes spiritual maturity to restrain yourself from using cuss words, even though you techinically could”.
I agree. It’s a fallacy that the only way something can be powerful or ‘real’ is if it’s portrayed in full detail. Following up on your pedophile example, at no point in my life will I need to read about an act of pedophilia in any level of detail for it to be powerful and icky and disturbing. A skilled writer can give you the same sense of dread and horror with few or no specific details of the act itself.
In a broader sense, though, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with going into those kinds of details in a story if that’s what you want to do. You just have to take a step back and say that NOW, it’s not appropriate for certain audiences. Write what you want to write in as much gory detail as you want, but don’t be surprised or offended or angered when the market you want to sell your work in rejects it. Don’t insult the readers or publishers because they don’t share your opinion that the market needs to expand what it considers acceptable to include the controversial elements YOU now consider to be perfectly okay and acceptable (and even instructional or ‘real’) to a mainstream Christian readership. The Christian market is like no other market, because “Christian” isn’t a genre, it’s a way of life and the only path to eternal life.
Does that put anything labeled “Christian” under somewhat of a Lowest Common Denominator level of acceptability? Yes, absolutely. As a mature Christian, I should be mindful and more importantly RESPECTFUL of the lowest common denominator members of my faith (babes in Christ).
Victor, thanks for the detailed responses. I must be brief (I’m at work) so excuse me if this comes off curt, but this still begs the question as to WHY the Christian market has such strict language guidelines. Is this theological or preferential? On what grounds must a character in a Christian fiction book be prevented from saying “damn”? Because the audience doesn’t want it? If so, then I ‘m asking WHY. Is it the fundamentalist “holiness” mindset?
Why does it matter why someone doesn’t want it? Long before I ever became a Christian, I didn’t like profanity. But now that I am a Christian, all the choices I make I have to look at through a completely different prism. How is that choice affecting ME and my relationship to Christ, and how is that choice possibly impacting those around me? I don’t live in a vacuum.
Everyone has their own vices they struggle with. Using profanity, or being affected by it isn’t one that I struggle with, so seeing it in print or in a movie, or hearing it out in the world isn’t a stumbling block for me. But I know it is for others. I know for some, using profanity (or stopping using it) is one of the basic things they are grasping onto to gain CONTROL in their own life. We all have those tiny battlegrounds. If I can stop doing THIS, then I can build on that and work towards the BIG things in my life.
There’s nothing ‘holy’ about any of those sorts of things, although for many Christians, those battlegrounds are tied up inextricably with their faith. That’s not legalism or fundamentalism or anything else. It’s “I want to eliminate, SACRIFICE, this part of my life as an offering to God.”
Are there some people who reject things purely for fundamentalist, holier-than-thou reasons? Of course. But you can’t justify fueling controversy by saying it needs to be done to refute those extremists.
If mainstream Christianity (both readers and the publishers) say they don’t want profanity/sex/drugs/alcohol portrayed in their books, just accept and respect that. Find a publisher that openly markets its titles as ‘extreme’ or ‘edgy’. Or better yet, self-publish. The ranks of “99 cent Kindle Millionaires” are growing every day.
Bottom line, don’t be mad at Mom and Dad because they don’t want to let you smoke in the house. If you absolutely HAVE to smoke, then go do it somewhere else.
I agree that some people are “professional weaker brothers”; as I said, my particular learning style is extremely rare. Most folks don’t get any more influenced to say words by reading them.
And so what if I am more likely to say damn after I’ve read a lot of books with it? That word isn’t inherently sinful. I, personally, dislike saying it—I actually don’t curse at all in person, unless I’ve been reading too much objectionable language.
But I don’t like eating squash, either, to the point of getting myself invited elsewhere when my mother makes pumpkin soup. That doesn’t make it sinful for my mother to make that soup and expect others to eat it.
Far more people are audio learners than my specific brand of visual learner, and are therefore more likely to pick something up by hearing it. My brother has a foul mouth when he’s frustrated or angry. What bothers me is that he sometimes takes the Lord’s name in vain without realizing it. Far fewer people protest that than they do the words in writing, though hearing the words actually affects more people.
Christian fiction as a whole seems to be marketed to a particular segment of Christian. If that’s your intended audience, fine, but what about when it isn’t?
I remember reading one Christian book, a sci-fi analogy, and being impressed by the character depth and development; some reviewers complained about the sensuality and drug addiction, but not a peep was said about the issue that bothered me: the entire analogy had some serious (heretical*) theological implications that probably weren’t intended. What was the more serious issue there?
*By heretical, I mean to emphasize that it was doubtless something the publisher and author didn’t intend, because I can’t see any Christian publisher backing that particular implication, which is part of the definition of cult.
If a publisher’s that worried about its ability to market effectively to the intended customer segment, how much work would it be, really, to take a note from other entertainment industries and post a little white box on every book, with little black text specifying “Contains language, violence, and sensuality”?
…Actually, I think I’m going to make sure to add that kind of warning to all my books, when I make print versions.
Having experienced this in my own writing adventures in the CBA, I hear you loud and clear. An interesting thing I learned though, was that–when it comes to these kinds of things–it may surprise people to know that it’s not necessarily the publisher who feels this way. So, lest this should turn into another “This is why I hate the CBA” party in the comments section ;), I’ve found CBA editors actually open to this–but they still want to go the “safe” route on account of what the READERS–their paying customers–will say. Now, whether this fear is based on bad past experiences or just a fear of trying and failing, I don’t know.
Like you pointed out, I think it’s an issue for Christianity as a whole (or the individual believer to work out in their own heart) rather than just a Christian publishing industry thing. For instance, the Bible doesn’t say it’s wrong to drink, but it’s wrong to get drunk. There’s a “too far” limit in there. That requires moderation; that takes discernment. That takes concentration and soul searching. Bottom line, I think it’s just easier to swear off things (including swearing in your fiction) all across the board so as to remove any moral greyness. “Better to be safe than sorry”.
I understand that, even if I don’t always agree with it. But I guess when you’re writing, the idea (for publishers anyway) is for your story to appeal to as many people as possible. Let’s face it, the Christian Fiction readership is so small anyway, I’m sure the logic is, “Why shoot yourself in the foot by having ‘damn’ in there?” Again, I understand that–I don’t always agree with it.
How can words be sinful, in and of themselves? They’re syllables and sounds strung together. Now their impact, imo, can be sinful. Their intent can be wrong.
Good post. I came over from Heather’s. I don’t like cussing, not because of the word itself, but because of the meaning and intent behind cussing. And I think the Bible is pretty clear about HOW we’re to use our words.
That said, I do worry that Christianity for people has more to do with what they feel about things and what they’re taught (cultural morals) than with this guy named Jesus, who was really God, who laid down our life for us and wants us to LOVE and share what he did for us.
Being a Christian is about following Jesus. And that God-man preached some major morality that sometimes seems diluted by our cultural squabbles.
Thanks for the post, Mike. You and Heather are wading into some conflict-filled waters. 🙂
I think it all boils down to whether we, as writers (or really just as everyday Christians) believe in the idea of “stumbling blocks.” And if you do acknowledge them, do you feel it’s the responsibility of the writer to not create stumbling blocks, or is it the responsibility of the reader to be mature and strong enough not to stumble over them?
Victor, see my response to Carradee above. If mainstream Christian audiences are being stumbled by language, then I would revert back to the question in my post: Why? If it’s on the grounds of genuine “immaturity” or “personal sensitivty,” I would follow up by asking how that specific “spiritual demographic” has come to represent an entire industry.
“Damn” is demonstrably not inherently sinful, because it can mean something completely benign in another language. Unless fundamentalists want to try to make the case that 1) homophonic phenomena is a sin itself (i.e., the vibrations of air coming from a human mouth is evil), and 2) English is the standard for determining these types of sin (i.e., what about cursing in another language?).
That’s a tough case to make but I’d like to see someone try it.
Interesting post, Mike. I was talking with a friend about this just the other day. We came to the conclusion that the use of profanity was, at its core, the same as any other act: an issue of the heart, and the motivation behind it. Are you cursing that which God has made, or cursing that which rightfully deserves to be cursed?
“Damn” isn’t too sinful for contemporary respectable fiction.
It’s too masculine.
Feminine horror and pop culture like Saw, Jane Austen versus Zombies (or whatever), Twilight, Buffy, Tomb Raider etc. all orbit around the feminine struggle with the concept of submission.
Damnation is exile, rejection, doom, wandering, loss – all masculine concerns – concerns currently out of favor with the culture of books, where tolerance, acceptance, safety, etc. are the chief themes.
Damn, like Adam, is damned.
Oh my gosh, that is so profound! I might have to quote you on that. 🙂
Watch your language, young whippersnapper!
I’ve been tinkering with swear words in my own work. Too many, of course, and the characters start sounding like that one foul-mouthed character in every Michael Chrichton book who winds up getting eaten by the T-rex or sent back in time to the black plague.
I’ve cone to the conclusion that sometimes a character will say damn. Like when one character has just realized that he and the other character have been stabbed in the back by someone they trusted and helped. “Oh damn.”
Used sparingly, mild swearwords (damn being mild compared to the F-bomb!) have a lot of impact. In another story, the villain explains that his massively injured condition is due to the hero’s actions, and viciously refers to the hero as an SOB. Uncalled for? Maybe. But it conveys the villain’s feelings in one punchy sentence.
Not that this would ever get published, especially by CBA. But in my opinion, swear words have impact when used sparingly. They do add color to characterization.
Damn is literally a curse. If you damn someone, you’re cursing them (or a situation). Fuck is not. So tell me again why damn is a milder word than fuck? Sorry, I’m just coming at this from a historical perspective. Why is it that words with Anglo-Saxon origins are inherently vulgar, while those with Latin origins aren’t? Sounds like snobbery to me.
I was going culturally, not historically. Why is “bloody” a swear in the UK?
Bloody is one of those words that is etymologically difficult to figure out. There are many theories behind why it’s a swear word (shortening of “by our lady”, for example). Suffice it to say, it’s a swear word that has lost its history. My favorite (as in most believable) theory is that it’s derived from “God’s blood”, which would put it in the class of bad words disrespecting God or Jesus. It’s also not a swear word outside the UK, except perhaps in certain parts of Canada, probably due to its lost meaning. Fuck and damn carry explicit meanings in all the English speaking world, although in Dublin street language, fucking is used as a kind of adjective. So no Latin snobbery there, I guess.
Jill, I believe the bias against Anglo-Saxonisms (including the infamous eff word) is a relic from the post-Norman Conquest days when French was the language spoken at court and English the speech of the rougher classes. To this day people will say ‘defecate’ without hesitation, whereas ‘shit’ is not deemed polite or appropriate. They mean the same exact thing. But we English speakers have inherited that class-conscious bias from 1000 years ago.
Another interesting note along the same lines; I know you have chosen to avoid reading Harry Potter and would not be automatically aware of this but in that series all rowling’s good guys have Anglo-Saxon names (Granger, Potter, Longbottom) or Celtic names (McGonagle) while the baddies have Latinate (ie French) names like Draco Malfoy. When Tom Riddle goes bad he sheds his A-S name to adopt the Frenchified handle of Voldemort.
I personally think Rowling did this subconsciously but out of the same seeds of class-bias that have tainted our little language for a millinium.
Yes, you’re almost certainly right about that (the historical reasons for the bias). I’m still thinking of giving HP another try. 🙂
As a reader and reviewer and Christian I tend to stay away from books with excessive cursing and graphic sexual content. I get really offended at the *f* word and I get extremely offended at the Lord’s name being taken in vain. For me the reason is that I have a rated R mouth. I do not need to be feeding those flames. As the saying goes, “garbage in, garbage out” it is true in my case. If I pick up a book that is said to be “Christian” in content I do not want to be slapped in the face with foul language. You are right though when you say that Christians don’t have a problem with the violence. At least in my case I don’t. I guess it all depends on what our stumbling block is. Mine happens to be foul language, I am not tempted to go out and commit murder and mayhem, but I am much more likely to let a curse word fall from my lips. I think too that it all amounts to our convictions. You mentioned the whole list of taboos for Christians, “Tobacco. Nicotine. Television. Drums(gasp, my daughter plays the drums..at CHURCH)” what is right for one person, may not always be right for another. As always you have raised a good discussion question!
Part of me opposes it on quality: When, take film for example, there are over 300 F bombs in an hour and half long film I object. It tells me the screenwriter has talent but refuses to think. If I read a novel with some F-words the author can still have talent. Excessive language makes me hesitant to say an author has talent. Just cause if you are a writer you dont “need” it, at least not always.
Then again I write short stories and I wrote a creative non-fiction about a conversation I had with my uncle. I used the F-bomb a few times because it was how he spoke and I was being faithful in portraying reality.
You dont NEED to swear but there is nothing inherently wrong with it.
I hope this inchoherentish comment makes sense.
Wow! colorful discussion here!
I tend to read secular and inspirational fiction and recently read a secular book that dropped the F Bombs so much I felt blown off the map in my own home! However, if we know the meaning of terms and connotations we should be okay.
I don’t have a cursing problem, or a problem reading it, just as long as it isn’t there to appeal to me as a reader and it has a tight plot. A character which has a foul mouth or who let’s it slip out shouldn’t be a book condemned. Just tell the story.
I saw Buzz Aldrin speak not long after Apollo 13 came out and he said that he didn’t find it very realistic (if only in one way): the guys in the program didn’t swear nearly enough!
Funny. I heard the quote being that they swore too much. If they had sworn like that in real life, they would have been fired.
I believe you are thinking of the dramatic, bordering on hysterical language (for movies, fairly tame and reserved, but for real life – confrontational) between ground and sky and, yes, those dialogs were completely curse free in real life.
That is because of mission focus and safety: No extra words were ever used between Mission Control and the Capsule – including curses. You can read the transcript for that. It is downright dull out of context.
Aldrin was talking about the on-earth scenes and the general culture at NASA. To think that a bunch of war veterans wouldn’t find Anglo-Saxon language more frequently than characters in a modern PG movie was silly. He was mostly making a joke about the movie by way of pointing out that the people of NASA are people, not machines.
Man, Mike, you really like pouring gasoline in the old hornet nest, don’t you? *G*
That said, several people here have pointed out the dichotomy between “Christian fiction” (easily found with a simple Google search, including your stuff and mine, brother), and “a Christian writing fiction” (a little trickier to triangulate, with the most notable ones being Lewis, Tolkein, Tolstoy, Dickens, O’Connor, Sayers, Percy, Grisham, Koontz, and others).
In the end, of course, it boils down to readership: Christians will accept A, B, or C in their novels, will eschew D, while E & F will incense them; secular readers will tolerate much more.
The trick, in the end, is who to figure out who your audience is. And after four CBA novels, I finally understood I’ve been writing for the wrong folks.
Like the Children of Israel wandering in the Wilderness, we keep stumbling over the same old ground. (you could also quote Pink Floyd here) I know whenever this topic is dusted off and thrown down, it’s a sure-fire guarantee for multiple and varied responses, but I’m bone-tired.
Don’t we all have novels to write? I say, go write ’em honestly to the best of your ability for the people you want to reach, and let the chips fall where they may.
Agreed! And sadly, that means I’m probably going to unsubscribe for a while, as I find it too easy to be guilty of contributing to the noise when this topic does (often) come up. Although, I suppose I’m ultimately grateful for this discussion, as it’s helped me discover clarify my own views on the subject, which are apparently opposite of most of the people here. But like you said, now it’s time to just go off and WRITE.
I was at a book signing a couple of months ago, and I thought of you. There was the author, not a Christian, saying that she didn’t feel she needed to put swearing in her book to make it realistic. In fact, she wrote around it because it knew it would offend some people. She pointed out a character from the first in the series (which I had just read) which would have sworn in real life. And she was right, he didn’t swear. And I didn’t miss it.
So this goes to one of my points – yes, I do think it is lazy writing. In fact, I have often marveled at how some writers throw in swear words like crazy in the first half of their story and use them more sparingly in the second half, when you think characters would swear more. It’s almost like they were just trying to get the ball rolling, and once it took off, they didn’t need their crutch.
And a different point:
My pastor did a series on the doctrine of Hell this summer, and in the first message, he talked about how much that word is thrown around and how it has lost its meaning as a result. It’s the same thing with damn. We throw it around without thinking about it, and then when we discuss someone being damned to Hell for all eternity, it doesn’t mean as much to us as it should.
Words have meaning and power, even swear words. A writer needs to not only use the right word, but make sure they aren’t robbing words of their power. Honestly, I think using damn or hell does just that unless we are using them in their correct context.
Thanks for comenting, Mark. I’m not trying to be combative (OK, maybe just a little), but this still doesn’t answer my question. WHY is having a character utter the word “damn,” lazy writing? On what grounds?
I’ll answer your question with a question of my own. Why are you constantly arguing to be allowed to use swear words? (This isn’t your first post about it. In fact, you might say it is a crusade with you.) Why can’t you find a way to create realistic characters without using words that offend part of your target audience?
(And let’s leave out whether the audience should be offended by it or not. Let’s actually make this about you instead of us for a change.)
Well said!
It’s lazy for the same reason why you don’t swear openly in public, or at church. Do you not drop F-bombs or damns in church because of ‘holiness’? Even someone who swears like a sailor (or astronaut) in private is able to usually find other ways of expressing the same level of shock or disbelief or outrage while they are in a non-swearing environment. If I found out my child’s teacher told the students to “open your damn books to page 44”, that would not only be inappropriate, but we’d question that teacher’s entire decision-making ability. If that teacher (or whoever) can’t find another way to say what they want to say without using profanity, it’s not just lazy, it speaks to their character.
There’s always other ways to say or imply something, and for any author writing books for non-edgy audiences (Christian, children’s, YA) to not want to make the effort to find another way, to me, that speaks of arrogance and laziness more than “keeping it real”.
I won’t have time for an in-depth response till I get to a computer. Suffice to say, I don’t think Vic or Mark are anywhere near answering this question. If I’m not mistaken here, Vic, your answer is It’s lazy because it’s not socially acceptable. Problem is a.) Many words not allowed in Christian fiction are acceped in mainstream socciety (we need only sample AM radio, primetime TV, and the box office favorites), and b.) We often must depict socially unacceptable characters. Anyway, give me a chance to commet more detailed on this later. I appreciate your comments!
But, Mike, if you are writing for your audience, you should be writing what your audience will enjoy. Yes, I know writers are supposed to write what they love. But at some point you do have to have your audience in mind, or you won’t sell anything.
And I do think my question is legitimate. You keep asking me to examine my notions on the issue. Why do you think you have to have these words to be a good writer?
Meanwhile, I’m going to stick to my initial response that using words for their non-intended purpose robs them of their power. Satan wants us to use these words to rob them of their power. Why is Hell a swear word and not Heaven? Why is God a swear word and not Buddah? As Christians, we know what these words should mean, so we should be respectful of them and only use them appropriately. And, yes, that includes in fiction where the character you are writing might use the word in real life. I would rather have the proper respect for God and His Word (and all the words we have discussed so far can be traced to some theology), then be “realistic” in my writing.
(blinking blearily) Combine what I am saying with what Katherine Coble (and many others multiple times in these similar discussions) and you’ll see what I’m saying. The market is society. It has norms and has said what it wants (and more importantly, what the gatekeepers want). To buck against the system and say you want to do it your own way at the peril of being shunned from that society/market is laziness or worse, arrogance. “I want to do it my way and I’m going to complain if you don’t let me.” My point about profanity in public is not about acceptability or holiness or anything else. It’s only that when we are placed in a situation where swearing, or punching people randomly or walking around naked, as functioning mature adults, we find a way to express ourselves in different ways. People are “real” in public all the time without using profanity. Never once am I out in public and hear people talking and say to myself, “I’m not buying it. Not enough profanity.” On the surface, it’s not needed as we see in general conversation every single day. So to say it’s needed in fiction, especially mainstream Christian fiction, to prove that it’s authentic or real is ridiculous.
Nearly every comment about putting profanity in one’s fiction, including your comments, Mike, smacks almost entirely of “I want to put profanity in my stories because that’s what I want to do.” Any justification is simply that, hollow justification. Mainstream Christian readers and publishers don’t want certain kinds of content. End of story. The fault doesn’t lie with them, it lies with the writers who refuse to work within the system they’ve CHOSEN to be in. I get it that no one likes anyone telling them what they can and can’t do, especially when the belief is that those gatekeepers/consumers are narrow-minded idiots who won’t let them have any fun.
Here’s the argument in a nutshell, as I see it.
• CBA sells TONS of books and has a HUGE reach.
• Getting one’s book into CBA means at least a chance at huge success.
• CBA has specific criteria for what they will and won’t publish.
• Many writers are incensed that their books are falling into the “won’t publish” pile, mostly because of what is perceived as narrow-minded publishers and/or reader opinion.
• Because they aren’t in CBA, book sales will likely be in the hundreds, rather than thousands or tens of thousands or more.
• This makes writers have frowny faces as they see TONS of books they consider unworthy and sanitized bought by readers they consider legalistic and narrow-minded.
• Rather than modify their works to conform to this colossal publishing entity and a marketplace that has clearly spoken, these incensed writers are lashing out at the system and attempting to bring about a revolution at the end of which, they hope this huge gatekeeper of Christian fiction will be forced to allow their works in, unchanged, which will in turn elevate the intelligence and open-mindedness of the stupid readers.
It just really smacks of arrogance to demonize anyone who doesn’t want to see objectionable material in their mainstream Christian fiction. Let that battlefield (and the access to all those juicy bookstores) go. Just as the CBA had to do, go out and CREATE the marketplace that will embrace the types of books you want to write. If it’s about the integrity of your work, write it like you want and then publish it where it will be accepted. If it’s more about how many copies you want to sell or how much money you need to make your writing career viable, then conform and write what people want to read and booksellers want to sell.
Okay, I’m done, lol. Deep breath.
“I’m not buying it. Not enough profanity.”
Victor, you win the internet with that quote, my friend. I really am considering putting that on a T-shirt.
I actually have heard folks say “I’m not buying it; not enough profanity.” More than once.
And frankly, that “Swearing isn’t socially acceptable” is a blind argument. I live in the Bible belt, walking distance from one of the big conservative colleges. While my own friends tend to avoid cursing, we’re the exception, not the norm.
It isn’t hard to find folks—yes, even Christians!—who drop the f bomb casually, who cuss, who make crude jokes. My own parents pitch a fit over my brother using the f word, but they don’t think twice about innuendo at the dinner table.
Like Patrick above I do feel like we have been here once or twice.
To answer your specific question as to why the use of epithets in Christian Market Writing is lazy:
Because the employer has asked you not to.
I’ve been thinking a lot about my work for hire writing since the whole “I can’t be calling myself a writer until I have fiction published” discussion.
This post brings my further thoughts home to bear. A professional writer is one who writes for pay. As with any other professional, she must do the job to her employers’ satisfaction. If her employers want a high level of detail about medical malpractice laws she puts that in there even though her creative side would rather throw in a crisp, funny anecdote.
We have already long ago established that the scope of reading for most Christians far exceeds the Christian Niche market. But if you are writing for that market, YOU WRITE WHAT YOUR EMPLOYER WANTS.
Yes. It’s weird. Yes. It lacks an internal logic.
But people buy that product because they like the flavor. And it’s lazy writing for an author to say “I wanna do it my way because that’s easier.”
Katherine, I agree with this except… it still doesn’t answer my question as to WHY. Where do these strictures come from? Are they just some strange moral alchemy brewed by Christian readers? Do they have a solid Scriptural warrant? You wrote “the use of epithets IN CHRISTIAN MARKET WRiTING is lazy” (emphasis added). This is as close to a legit answer I can see here. “Lazy writing” has nothing to do with the insertion of “damn,”but with the violation of market guidelines. Which means that if the market’s guidelines specify NO MENTION OF ITALIAN FOOD, “lazy writing” would be having one of my characters blatantly prepare spaghetti and meatballs instead of bean burritos. yeah, I get it. 😉
I’d say it’s most likely a combination of cultural and socioreligious strictures found in their primary audiences. And yes, as we’ve many of us agreed in previous discussion on the matter it’s often the tail wagging the dog.
In the specific case of the word “damn”, it is itself not taking the Lord’s name in vain. But it is–especially within the Christian Community–taken to have the unstated implication of “God damn”, which is taking the Lord’s name in vain. And, as Christians we are called to save others, not damn them. So you’ll find Christians in my parents’ age bracket especially (55-75) who believe that “Damn” is indistinguishable from “God Damn” and would no more readily accept that in Christian fiction than they would if someone were to use “Jesus Christ” as an oath.
Actually, I’m a lot more understanding of bristles and prickles at the use of Damn than I am some of the other words you can’t use. I mean, come on. Panties? Really? That’s just a fusspot thing. But “damn” has some real socioreligious implications for a LOT of people across the Christian spectrum.
I think in the real world a lot of people do say “damn.” They say it casually and carelessly without a thought to a larger meaning. And placing that word in a well-chosen bit of dialogue can do a lot to illuminate that person’s character to your readers than a string of adjectives. Again, this is why I choose not to work for this employer. Just as I wouldn’t work at a place where women aren’t allowed to wear pants because I’d have to buy a whole new wardrobe. I can’t write for someone if I can’t use all the tools I deem necessary.
Now, part two of that is how many writers actually use “damn” as a piece of craft to illuminate a character and how many of them just use it because “that’s how people talk.” Frankly, I think the whole “that’s how people talk” argument IS veering toward lazy. People say a lot of things. Sometimes they say “my butt itches” or “you know, I really don’t like to shop at Kohl’s anymore.” There’s a lot of throw-away verbiage in the daily world that a writer has to pare down to get to the soul of the person and the soul of the story. “Damn” really is one of those words that can often be peeled away without much problem.
…Unless you’re writing something specifically for-hire for that publisher, a publisher isn’t your employer. They’re a distributor. If anyone’s the “employer” in that situation, it’s the writer, not the publisher.
The writer is the one who owns the copyright and licenses out the right to print it to the publisher, who wants that right. The writer has the choice of who he or she wants to work with.
The writer is not an employee.
(Sorry to nitpick over that, but it’s a common enough misconception that it makes me twitch.)
Now, if the writer wants to be published in a specific venue, though a particular distributor, then the writer must adjust the writing to fit—but again, that’s the writer’s choice. The writer doesn’t have to go that route.
I’ve also never heard anybody argue against damn because of the *** damn construction. Ever. But then, I’m in a different demographic than you are.
Carradee, as I told xdpaul below I don’t liken the publisher to employee in this instance. The employee is the market of readership. They have made their wishes known time and again by voting with their wallets. And sending nasty emails to publishers–many of which I’ve had to read and answer.
Not sure about our differing demographics; do you refer to age or circumstance? But I can assure you that I’ve heard full sermons on the topic of the word “damn” as casual vanity. Granted that may well be due to age or worship bracket. However, the folks who have made this point are the exact folks going out and buying armloads of Karen Kingsbury novels so it stands to reason the Christian pubhouses would steer clear.
I was thinking along the lines of age, though that’s a good point about worship bracket. I’m younger than you are, and I’m a reformed Presbyterian.
In my demographic, I encounter far more people looking for what CBA refuses to publish than for what it does, which tells me there’s an audience that isn’t being sought. If CBA publishers don’t want to fill that gap, that’s their prerogative, but there is a market segment for something other than those Karen Kingsbury books.
Yeah, but then the problem becomes trying to convince that “unreached” audience that there ARE books in the CBA that aren’t like Karen Kingsbury (or what have you). I’ve seen people dismiss the entire Christian Fiction market, still thinking that everything’s one way when, in reality, there are books trying to be different (like Mike’s). But if you can’t convince them to move beyond bad past experiences or misconceptions to try something different, then they don’t buy those “edgier” (I hate that word) books and then the CBA’s point is proven: “Nobody buys edgy books”. So it kind of feeds itself.
Oh, I agree, Greg. I’m a case in point. I learned long ago to avoid CBA, and even though I now know there’s fiction I’d like even within the CBA genre, but I’ve been burned enough that I have a hard time making myself try it.
Because even in the past year, my track record is still that I have to buy about 3 books to get 1 that I enjoy enough to even finish.
^^^ THIS
Well said, Katherine. At the end of the day if a writer wishes to sell novels to the CBA, he/she must understand that market has its own paradigms and taboos. An no matter how loony, odd, or just plain wrong those guidelines may seem, they’re ignored at the writer’s peril.
As I said upthread, said scribe has two choices: conform their stories to CBA specs, or take them elsewhere.
I wanted to take a minute to answer a couple of the issues raised by Mark and Victor. And perhaps dispel some of the possible perceptions raised as a result.
Both of my novels, THE RESURRECTION and THE TELLING (May 2012) are published by a Christian publisher. They are aimed at believers and faith seekers. Neither of those novels have much language. Very mild stuff (“crap” and “flippin'” were the big ones in The Resurrection; I fought for “go to hell” but couldn’t get it, and it wasn’t worth dying for). In fact, I rarely use much foul language in my stories. I’ve never had a character use the F-word, for instance. I am currently in final edits for The Telling. Thus far I’ve had to remove ONE inappropriate word. (It was “damn,” for the record.) The story just doesn’t need it. One character would definitely cuss. But I know enough to not force the issue, and he comes across sufficiently bad. I know who I am writing for, who I’m published by, and have no problem adhering to the guidelines. None.
Mark asked, “Why are you constantly arguing to be allowed to use swear words?” Mike replies, “Because I think the guidelines we’ve adopted reek of something unbiblical, ultra-conservative, and moralistic. And to be clear, I’m not saying we should throw the shutters wide and let everything go. I’m arguing for PG, PG-13, even R-rated Christian fiction.”
Mark said, “Why can’t you find a way to create realistic characters without using words that offend part of your target audience?” Mike said, “I think I have and can.”
Victor said, “Nearly every comment about putting profanity in one’s fiction, including your comments, Mike, smacks almost entirely of ‘I want to put profanity in my stories because that’s what I want to do.'” Mike responds, “That’s not at all what I intend, Victor. I don’t want to put profanity in my stories on a whim, recklessly,to be a rebel, or just to offend. I want to put SOME profanity in my stories because that’s the way the characters really talk.”
It might not seem like it, but I’m not out to bash the CBA. I’m immensely indebted to Debbie Marrie and Charisma House. I have many friends who write and read in the CBA. There’s loads of great authors and fantastic Christian fiction. However, the CBA, Christian consumers, the Church, Christian publishers, or Christian authors shouldn’t be above criticism. I happen to feel that this is one of those issues that are worth continued debate and discussion. Sorry.
Thanks for the lively comments! I appreciate you guys.
But you see, you’re talking to someone who tries to avoid most of the R rated things in life, be they movies or books. PG-13 should be rarer than it is.
I find if I fill my mind with too much profanity, sex, violence, it comes through my mind and actions. Yes, I need to filter what comes in so I can avoid becoming too much like the world.
And I enjoy Christian fiction because I know that the level of violence and sex is low (hinted at is very different from in your face let’s push the poundries as much as we can) and language is practically nill. It’s nice to be able to lower my shields some when enjoying entertainment. (Obviously, I can’t lower it completely. We should always be using discernment.)
Of course, this is coming from the single guy who still goes to every Disney and Pixar and family oriented movie he can and enjoys them. My tastes are different from most adults.
The publisher is not a writer’s employer. Ever.
They are his partner. Publishers are banks, printers, distributors and (horrible) marketers. They don’t know the first thing about which art sells: they are more concerned with having a volume of art that sells reliably. They don’t care (too deeply) if it is a Titian or a Velvet Elvis.
This is why Random House (or whoever) will print a translation of Beowulf and Snookie’s autobiography the same month. To think that a publisher gives a damn about a damn is silly. [Not talking about editorial teams here]. He cares about the dollars.
The reader is the writer’s employer. The writer writes for her.
If she wants “damn,” she gets “damn.”
The employer argument is interesting, but a complete fallacy.
I made the error of conflating two situations without clarifying
Blame typing on the iPhone. I was trying to use my experience as a WFH writer to show that the audience for the fiction in the Christian marketplace IS analogous to an employer. I stand by that.
Ah – sorry. I stand by that too. You and I can stand together and agree that xdpaul is an idiot.
I never liked that guy, anyhow.
Oh, but I like him quite a lot. At least what I know of him from the Internet.
Now that I’m at an actual keyboard and can touchtype to my little heart’s content….
I think the publishers in the CBA do come in for a lot of grief because of their strictures. But those strictures come from knowing their market very well.
(I personally think they underserve their market by settling too often for mediocre product, but that’s another topic to be hashed to death. )
The problem is that there are a lot of us Christians who don’t mind PG-13 & R content in fiction but are having to look outside the Christian Fiction marketplace. There are two solutions to this problem:
Either some boutique houses (a la Marcher Lord) need to be more aggressive about placement–and stop publishing titles with glaring grammatical incorrectness–or Christian authors need to find homes in secular houses. AT this juncture no one is going to remake existing Christian pub houses any time soon.
Are you talking about the Williamson books (re: grammatically incorrect?)
Because those are fully intentional, and (like it or not) common to the genre. It is borrowed meter, such as from T.S. Arthur’s The Children’s Hour [atop the cupboard, by shadows hid/a little blue honey pot filled to the lid.]
I’m not sure why Marcher Lord should be particularly more aggressive about placement when 90% of their titles continue to pay royalties, even though some have been out for years, I come across them with regularity in libraries, and they are available for ordering or shelf-placement, I presume at a bulk discount.
I’m probably following the wrong rabbit trail here again.
As a Stephen King fan, I have no problems with graphic, gory details used skillfully and professionally. 🙂
Mike,
Great post! Very thought provoking and you spur quite a discussion. I recommend posting this on the Just the Write Charisma blog also.
The Bible is filled with the worst violence and gore. That is why Christians find it acceptable.
Damn!
Can I not damn an unclean spirit in the fiction I write?
Damn you to Hell!
God damn(s) you!
Are we not specifically taught in Scripture to drive evil out in the name of Jesus our God?
As long as Christians remain separatists, two things are going to recur indefinitely:
1) No one is going to want to hear what we whitewashed sepulchers have to say and
2) Our art, books, films, and other media are going to continue to embarrass both the Believer and unbeliever… as they do today.
The Bible, likely the very best source for all speculative fiction and visual art, is filled with ‘gory detail’ of every sort. A favorite horror story that actually disgusts me to no end? How King David privately lusts after a naked girl as she bathes her voluptuous body on a moonlit rooftop, later having the nymph’s husband murdered so he can marry her and “make it right” with God.
Humans are disgusting. We are saved by the grace of God. We have to show both parts if we are going to be honest with ourselves and honest with those who are to be touched by our work.