There’s a long-standing opinion that Christian fiction is inferior to mainstream fiction, both in craft and content. Is this a valid criticism?
Several months ago, Online Journal of Christian Communication and Culture, ran an article entitled Diluted Reality, in which they addressed this subject. Their take was decidedly critical:
Christian fiction is full of stories that don’t portray human beings as fallen creatures or as beings of weakness. This genre distorts life by presenting a model of perfection. No matter which sub-genre one delves into there is a glossy shine that makes it all look plastic. There are rare exceptions to this and rarer still are those that come from modern authors. Most lived in a different age, when Christian publishers didn’t run amuck and Christian audiences weren’t looking for a quick fix. Contemporary “Christian” fiction is not an accurate portrayal of reality or excellence in the fiction genre.(emphasis mine)
Despite what you might think, this article is not a smear piece. It’s a good representation of much of the criticism against Christian fiction — that it is unrealistic, plastic, contrived, a quick fix, or as the above author later writes, “these novels are shallow and something of a joke amongst the literary community.”
As a writer of Christian fiction, I’ve thought much about such charges. Even more fascinating to me, however, is how Christians typically react to them. We question the person’s motives, how much they’ve read in the genre, and refuse to recognize any validity to the notion that Christian fiction is inferior to mainstream fiction. I have problems with this approach. Why?
Because it makes us apologists for Christian fiction, not objective readers. And that puts us behind the eight ball.
Recently, I’ve been revisiting this question. I read a Christian fiction novel from a fairly recognizable writer who will remain unnamed. The writing was solid. The story, however, was fairly cliched, capped by a “come to Jesus” moment that was so utterly canned I groaned out loud.
I was VERY disappointed.
It was everything that Christian fiction is charged with being.
So do I just need to read a bigger sampling of Christian fiction? Is that it? Here’s why I don’t think so: This type of cliched ending is exactly what many Christian readers want.
In my opinion, this is where Christian fiction IS inferior to mainstream fiction. Our industry used to be charged — and rightly so — with inferior craft. I don’t think that’s the case any longer. When critics suggest that Christian fiction is inferior to mainstream fiction because it is more poorly written, they are just flat-out wrong. There is just as much poorly written stuff in the general market as there is in the Christian market. (I recognize this is a weak, but often used argument.) Positively, there are just too many well-written Christian fiction books out there to make that case.
So regarding craft, Christian fiction v. mainstream fiction is a wash.
The weight of the argument that Christian fiction IS inferior to mainstream fiction, is not in craft, but convention. There are certain expectations that Christian readers have, certain cliches and conventions, that simply make our stories more predictable, more heavy-handed, more forced. Or as the author of the above article concluded,
A good book will be well-written in a literary sense and include biblical themes that aren’t contrived. A writer ought to be able to write from the heart and include his or her beliefs without force-feeding the reader. It’s impossible to write without infecting a work with the author’s world view. So why do so many think that they must stuff them into their works?
Sadly, this was the experience I had when I finished the aforementioned novel: Force-fed.
So when someone suggests that Christian fiction is inferior to mainstream fiction, they need to clarify. If they mean that it’s poorly written, I think the charge is bogus. But if they mean it’s cliched and predictable, for the most part, I have to agree.
Christian fiction gives its readers what they want. And this is what makes it inferior to mainstream fiction.
“Christian fiction gives its readers what they want. And this is what makes it inferior to mainstream fiction.”
Whereas mainstream fiction doesn’t? I agree that the major audiences for mainstream fiction don’t want what the Christian fiction readers do; and much of what the mainstream audience wants (including pornography, blood-and-gore violence, unattractive and unsavory characters) the Christian audience don’t want (or are ashamed of wanting). But I don’t think mainstream fiction is distinguished from Christian fiction by a great desire or intention to give the audience better, or even more, than what they want.
Of course, mainstream fiction may do better at delivering more or better things than the audience want, at surprising the audience. But that’s a matter of craft, is it not?
Sure, mainstream fiction gives its readers what they want. But what mainstream readers want is far more broad and often less predictable than what Christian readers want. And saying that “what the mainstream audience wants” is simply “pornography, blood-and-gore violence, unattractive and unsavory characters” is way, way stereotypical. It’s a poor caricature of mainstream readers.
I think we probably agree more than disagree. I certainly did not intend to imply, and in fact I nearly denied, that what the mainstream audience wants is “simply” (i.e. only) “pornography, blood-and-gore violence, unattractive and unsavory characters”. I said it includes those things. There’s usually a reason behind stereotypes: post-judice rather than pre-judice more often than people want to admit. Mainstream readers do want other things. But they want those, and (some) mainstream writers serve them up.
I gave up reading Christian fiction. Sad, but true. I read mostly mainstream. And no, I don’t want to read “pornography, blood and gore violence, etc.” – what I DO want to read is true-to-life stuff. Christian fiction is so sanitized that it makes me roll my eyes. This is not how the world is – and yes, we are not supposed to be “of” the world, but we are all sinners. I want to read about people dealing with real issues of sin and in a realistic manner.
And, too, I have to admit that there are some Christian books I couldn’t read because the writing was so poor. But that also goes for mainstream fiction. There is generally a big lack of good craft in published works today. Sad.
Melissa:
There are several authors that I lean toward in Christian fiction because they are grappling with real-life issues, don’t always make the ‘right’ desiscions & don’t offer canned or cliche endong….but are written with a Christian worldview. They may not be literary marvels in writing style (by some folks standards) but the battles are real.
Not really sure who you read or what titles, here are 3 of authors I recommend:
Karen Kingsbury (Baxter family series & others!) they hit everything in the multiple series she has written expounding on various characters lives in the Baxter family & more as she progressed. She writes about 911, & I think tavkles topics some authors would prefer to shy away from.
Francene Rivers: just wow! I’ve never read one of her books and thought it canned or cliche. AND she is willing to tavkle some “church” issues to
Kristen Heitzmann-great “mystery” writer with Christian undertones. Sometimes predictible, but othertimes not.
I agree that it seems like the craft itself has run amuck with poor writing skills. And that makes me sad as well….regardless of genre, Christian & mainstream alike. It’s difficult to find great modern children’s authors sometimes too!
So, if Christian authors do it wrong … how do secular authors do it right?
Kessie, whereas the Christian market consists only of Christian authors, the mainstream market does not consist only of “secular authors.” There are many Christian writers and readers in the mainstream market. So I’m not sure that binary works. As I said in my comments above, I think Christian stories suffer from reader expectations in a way that mainstream fiction doesn’t.
This has me kind of confused. I’ve read Christian fiction all my life. Now my hubby has me reading the Dresden books, and I’ll be darned if he doesn’t spout some awesome pro-Christian rhetoric purely by letting the characters have moral standards. And also the paladin, Michael.
The books also contain sex, swearing and violence. It’s not excessive, but it’s an action novel and action novels tend to have that sort of thing. I’ve known Christian novels to have the sex and violence, but not the swearing. So there’s this weird line being drawn somewhere by what Christians will and will not read.
I think Christian authors forget that they are entertainers first. And the only way to be sure of entertaining someone with your work is to write what you yourself would enjoy reading. Why would I need a book telling me to come to Jesus? I did that a long time ago. I don’t need saved (not anymore), so I won’t write a book for the sole purpose of saving the reader. I don’t need preached to — I have a preacher for that, thanks-so-much — so I won’t preach to the reader. The biggest problem isn’t false portayal. . .the biggest problem is that Christians are more interested in saving souls through their books, than writing an entertaining story. if you -must- save souls, write non-fiction, or give all the profits from your novel to your local church or charities or something.
But this whole unrealistic thing. . .I don’t buy it. I mean, yes, you have a point . . . but it isn’t like the mainstream doesn’t write as contrived characters as Christian authors. Mrs. Carmody in The Mist was ridiculously contrived: A good example of a not-so-religious man writing a very religious character. This kind of religious straw-man is extremely popular today in otther art forms as well: Glee, anyone? And how about every character in nearly every mainstream novel swearing? Everyone swears now, apparently. Kind of like the “everyone smokes or has smoked weed” idea that has slipped into nearly every single film/book/tv show known to man.
Why is everyone alright with these inaccurate portayals of life? Because this is what the majority of outspoken folks are okay with believing about reality. They want to believe we all swear. (I don’t swear, btw, as a preference, not a religious choice. No, not even under stress. Swear words have never been part of my vocabulary, simple as that — so how am I supposed to relate to THAT?) We’ve all smoked weed. That truly religious people are either cold-hearted prudes or redneck idiots. They’re okay with believing that. It’s what they are conditioned to believe.
But make a straw-man atheist? Or a truly good Christian? (and yes, I know quite a few folks with little or no “dirty secrets” to own up to) Someone who doesn’t swear? Or maybe they don’t drink? No sir. Then you’re being silly. That’s not how people act. Shame on you. In truth, it’s not how society WANTS people to act.
But now I’ve wandered into a rant.
My point is. . .the only thing Christian authors are guilty of is not writing books that would entertain them. Not writing books for entertainment’s sake.
Mike, you are one fearless dude.
About three years ago, I looked at the paperback novels for sale at the supermarket. They were squarely aimed at the women’s market (likely because most of the shoppers are women). I selected one (with the least lurid cover), bought it and read it. It wasn’t just bad. It was grotesquely bad — stilted writing, convoluted plot, cardboard dialogue, and unbelievable characters. In fact, the cover was the least offensive thing about it.
Three weeks later, I saw the novel mentioned in the newspaper — it was on the New York times paperback bestseller list. So when I hear people talk about bad Christian fiction, I have to say that I have not read anything in Christian fiction that was as bad as that mainstream novel. I have read cliched and disppointing Christian novels, but that mainstream paperback still holds the crown for “worst fiction I have read.”
For us, I think the distinction is between “Christian writers” and “writers who are Christian.” Some of us believe we were called by God to be writers, and some of us are writers who write from a Christian perspective. Some of us work within the Christian publishing industry (or try to), and some of us work within the mainstream publishing industry (or try to). A few of us are in both (or try to). Poets who are Christian seem to have a less conflicted time of it, likely because very little poetry is published by Christian publishers — it’s mainstream or nothing for most books of poetry (with a few notable exceptions).
I believe you’re right — Christian writers (and publishers) aim at readers’ expectations. But that bad supermarket novel did, too. Unfortunately.
My husband and I write inspirational poems from a different perspective, however my fiction is simply things I must get down on paper and it is there to entertain and inspire. Not from a purely religious perspective.
Good post, Mike. In my experience, the main difference is one of attitude. When “Christian” writers (scratch; let’s say when many Christian writers) sit down to write, it seems they’re starting from a kind of ministerial point of view. Many, though they may not be willing to say it out loud, believe they are on a literal mission from God to share some bit of wisdom and Truth. And who knows? Maybe they are. I don’t know.
My point, though, is that with any writing that originates from a position like that, whether it’s the Christian trying to propagate a Christian worldview, or the social liberal hoping to promote the support of gay marriage, the temptation to color a particlaur position in a positive light in stark contrast to the opposing position is too great for most authors to resist. Hence the glaring detachment from reality in Christian evangelical fiction. And I use the word “evangelical” in the literal, not sectarian sense: stories by authors trying to evangelize.
Like I said, I don’t know if this type of author has a real “calling” from God. I don’t know if this kind of fiction works or not for its audience. I only know that there’s a lot of it out there, that it’s not going away any time soon, and that I don’t enjoy reading it.
Okay, got to comment on two things here:
From Tony: “The biggest problem isn’t false portayal. . .the biggest problem is that Christians are more interested in saving souls through their books, than writing an entertaining story. if you -must- save souls, write non-fiction, or give all the profits from your novel to your local church or charities or something.”
So… what’s wrong with being entertaining and talking about people getting saved? How is that a bad thing?
From Mike: Christian fiction gives its readers what they want. And this is what makes it inferior to mainstream fiction.
Well, than that line of reasoning makes me conclude that Christian readers are inferior.
You know, this whole thing of “Christian books with blantant preaching/getting saved scenes in them are bad/inferior/whatever” is getting tiresome. Why can’t some Christian writers write those kind and others like the kind that has hardly any mention of overt Christianity or Jesus’ name? Don’t we have room for both?
Steve, I think we do have room for both. But I don’t think you’d know that by the Christian market. Your conclusion that this line of reasoning suggests that “Christian readers are inferior” is accurate, although I wouldn’t use the word “inferior.” Several years ago, T.L. Hines (Christian author now writing for Thomas Nelson) commented on one of my posts at Novel Rocket:
“…I do feel there’s a difference between ABA and CBA readers. And to be brutally honest, ABA readers are more sophisticated. I’m a little shocked when I see some reviews of my work on Christian book sites, with people decrying the lack of “Christian” content in a few of my works. I think, symbolically and metaphorically, the Christian content is rather obvious. Maybe a bit too obvious, as Publisher’s Weekly said of their review of my second book, “The Dead Whisper On.”
I do find it troubling that a fair amount of CBA readers (at least in my experience) have a hard time seeing symbolism; we should, after all, be BETTER about seeing these kinds of things since many of Jesus’s teachings were told in parables.”
You can see his entire comment HERE. I agree with Tony, especially that “ABA readers are more sophisticated.” This doesn’t mean that they’re smarter and we’re stupid, but that our demands for overt symbolism and genre conventions has lessened our capacity for… literary discernment. Thanks for commenting!
I agree that the Christian books that don’t fit the CBA “standards” get squeezed out or not even published–heck, that’s why I’m with Marcher Lord Press 🙂 And I enjoy your writings here, Mike — always thought-provoking.
The problem isn’t when someone in your novel gets saved, the problem comes in when you try to SAVE people WITH your novel. More likely you’ll just offend non-believers, and bore believers. Would you read an atheist novel attempting to convince you God wasn’t real? I wouldn’t.
Don’t misunderstand me, I think we can impact the culture through art. But it’s a slow process. It comes through being honest about the way we see the world, not by writing a sermon in the guise of fiction.
Bore believers? I don’t know — Frank Peretti’s “This Present Darkness” had some wild stuff with angels and demons, yet also had some strong “Come to Jesus” moments. I read that as a believer and I wasn’t bored.
Yes, I understand some books are preachier (real word?) than others. But that’s not a bad thing. People obviously want to read those kinds of novels.
Two things:
SOME Christian fiction _is_ bad from a craft standpoint. There was one novel I started to read not too long ago which was far worse from a craft perspective than anything I’ve seen coming out of our local middle school writing program for gifted students. Like non-sectarian fiction it has its good and bad points. What is unfortunate is that the gatekeepers of the Christian Fiction Marketplace are more interested in selling product than producing _books_. If the story will sell to their admittedly undiscerning key market, why worry about how horrible it is?
The other point: Some non-sectarian fiction is doing a far, far better job of wrestling with spiritual truths than _anything_ I’ve ever seen in the Christian fiction marketplace. One example would be _The Curse of Chalion_ by Lois McMaster Bujold. It stands next to _A Prayer for Owen Meany_ as the most powerful fiction I’ve ever read insofar as speaking to issues of faith, doubt and what it means to be given over to God. Since the Christian market is so focused on milk questions like making sure everyone is getting saved, it has to be left to the non-sectarian market to write books about what happens AFTER a person makes the choice to live in service to God.
And really, that’s where the EDGY, RISKY stories are. Not in the “I’m daring to show my characters have a glass of wine” way. Risky in “it dares ask the questions” way. And in both cases, the spiritual questions were very present but they weren’t always in your face.
I second that about THE CURSE OF CHALION. Also Megan Whalen Turner’s THE THIEF and sequels. I’d recommend those to any Christian I know who has enough imagination to understand that a book does not have to be an allegorical representation of Biblical monotheism in order to say powerful, resonant and true things about faith, redemption, and the relationship between man and God.
Excellent comment, Katherine. I haven’t heard of “The Curse of Chalion” before, but will check it out.
I also agree with you about the struggles of living the Christian life AFTER we are saved. We need more fiction that addresses this, IMO.
Mike, the assumptions and labels used by the article writer you quote make his or her argument less meaningful than it could be with a more intellectually rigorous approach. Here’s the most inaccurate thing he/she says:
“It’s possible to write without infecting a work with the author’s world view.”
All literary scholars would tell you that this is a silly statement, and I would be very surprised if this article writer has formally studied literature beyond the undergraduate level. If he/she has, there is surprising carelessness in how that statement is formulated. Actually, it’s NOT possible for an author to write without presenting his or her world view. Even a deliberate attempt to write from a different world view than one’s own will usually reveal the true world view beneath it, like a funhouse mirror. And few writers ever try to misrepresent their world views, because part of the reward of creating art is the self-expression involved. That doesn’t mean we don’t create *characters* with differing world views, but in the end, by juxtaposing the different characters and themes, it’s usually pretty easy to figure out the authorial philosophy of life that’s coming out in any given novel, even the cheesiest romance. (It may be a pretty shallow philosophy, but it’s still there.)
I think I understand what the article writer is trying to say, but it’s so amorphous and uninformed that someone else needs to write the article and make the point! The article writer is complaining about DIDACTIC fiction. In literary grad sch0ol, we often discuss the difference between didactic or ‘preachy’ fiction and fiction in which the world view is more organic. But there is no such thing as a novel without a world view. If this discussion were taking place in a literary classroom, it would be one sentence, everyone would nod, and we would move on. “Christian fiction is often didactic.” End of story.
If we want fresh, organic Christian fiction, we need more informed critics who have a firm grasp on the techniques and conventions of literature to explain what is contrived or clumsy in works that need help..people who have enough training to discuss in an articulate way why one novel is didactic and another is not. (And I will say that the number of non-didactic novels in the CBA seems to increase all the time, and it is CERTAINLY possible to write a satisfying and surprising novel in any genre that is not didactic. It would help if we had an established professional review with informed critics and excellent taste, but we don’t.
But the CBA is not unique in having problems with determining what is actually good fiction and what is not. I’ve noticed that in the secular literary fiction world, there are often weaknesses in professional journal reviewers’ knowledge and taste. (And I’m not alone in noticing this–many other industry professionals have commented on the overwritten and contrived nature of some of the most celebrated literary fiction novels today–some prettty bad and pretentious novels get rave reviews in major publications.) The fact is, there *are* ways to determine, on an aesthetic level, whether a novel is good or bad, well-written or overwritten, and some of the critics simply don’t know how to tell the difference. That is different from whether a novel is popular, which will always be a matter of taste.
Thanks for commenting, Rosslyn. As Chris mentioned below, you misread the quote. the author said, “It’s impossible to write without infecting a work with the author’s world view. ” Which leans to your point. I’d encourage you to read the entire article, if you haven’t. I agree that she uses generalizations, but I felt she used reasonably good examples to prove her point.
I totally agree with you that “the number of non-didactic novels in the CBA seems to increase all the time.” The problem is that the fact that we have to note there’s more non-didactic Christian novels proves that the stereotype (lots of didactic novels) is legitimate. If there weren’t as many didactic Christian novels, we wouldn’t need to applaud more non-didactic ones.
Mike, thanks for your response! See my mea culpa and riposte below. 🙂
“It’s IMpossible to write without infecting a work with the author’s world view. So why do so many think that they must stuff them into their works?”
Oops–and apparently, I need to put on my glasses in the morning! So, my apologies for the section of my comment based on my misreading of that sentence–the author of the article did not, in fact, say something as silly as what I typed in my misquotation. However, I did read her article, and I still maintain that this is not the kind of article that would be published in most secular journals as an example of ‘literary criticism.’ It just doesn’t say enough or say it in a new and rigorous way. As long as people are still rehashing these same criticisms (“Christian fiction is formulaic” “Christian fiction is didactic” “Christian audiences are puerile”) there won’t be any real way to distinguish the good from the bad. What we need to do, instead of bashing the novels that are forgettable, is hold up the new novels that are better, and promote them–and they ARE out there. They’re not perfect, but they do include more organic Christian worldviews, and if people want that type of book to survive, they have to stop bashing and start recommending.
Also, I have to point out that the weak prose style of the sentence: “It’s impossible to write without infecting a work with an author’s worldview” was precisely what made it so easy to misread! 🙂 We can’t call for excellence in fiction without demanding clarity and professionalism in our criticism as well.
Rosslyn, I think you’ll find that many things which appear in the world of Christian literary criticism would not pass muster in academic or post-academic circles. Literary criticism in the world at large is a rigorous discipline which benefits author and reader alike.
What I’ve found in Christian fiction circles is a slavish devotion to the five-star review accompanied by empty praises such as “I love this book!” Any detail as to _why_ the book is loved is missing. In the few instances where I’ve written a litcrit-style review of a Christian fiction novel I’ve been accused of being a bad Christian for not being affirming to my brethren and supporting their endeavours. I’ve said frequently in comments here and elsewhere that the current state of Christian fiction is owing in no small part to this lack of analytical criticism.
Many Christians need to come to the realisation that “love” doesn’t mean “blind acceptance.” Iron should be sharpening iron; Christian readers should be rigorously analytical in reviewing the books they read.
I don’t like the canned salvations, but I do thoroughly enjoy the Spiritual insights portrayed in most of the Christian books. They do leave me with hope at the end of the book, whereas I’ve read secular ones that leave me dealing with bitterness, revenge and anger. I’d take most Christian books over the the bitterness left in my mouth in a secular read.
I think perhaps the biggest problem here is that the Christian fiction market was created to provide a “safe haven” for Christians who enjoy fiction but don’t want their consciences offended by material they consider inappropriate and unedifying. The desire to maintain a right conscience before God is a good one, but the problem is that in order to reassure Christian readers that they are in fact reading something Edifying and not Worldly, it’s become necessary to maintain all these artificial and extrabiblical standards for What You Can And Cannot Put In A Christian Book.
Never mind that the Bible itself includes stories and characters that even a non-Christian reader might well be shocked and dismayed by — God may be able to get away with that level of gritty realism, but any time a Christian puts similar material into a story they’re in danger of (or at least open to being accused of) “glorifying evil” and pandering to the lusts of the flesh.
So “Christian fiction” has come to mean”fiction that won’t offend conservative Christians” and also “fiction that includes a clear Biblical message so as to reassure Christians that they are reading a Christian book”. Unfortunately, this also means “fiction that Christians can buy, read and recommend without having to exercise any discernment”.
By retreating into the ivory tower of Christian books written by Christians for Christians, we lose the ability to discern on a larger scale what kind of reading will best feed and deepen our own spiritual lives (and which books we are better to leave aside). We don’t have to worry about making moral decisions about what we read or when to stop reading, because we can trust “Christian fiction” to deliver something that is safe and palatable. (Never mind that the theology may be bad and the spiritual message of the book just as insidious and destructive as anything the world has to offer — witness the existence of books like “David and Bathsheba: A Royal Love Story”.)
Reading and writing only “Christian fiction” for our own comfort has a more widespread negative effect as well — it means we have disengaged with the rest of the world and lost touch with the books and stories that are shaping and influencing them. And in doing so, we lose the opportunity, or even the ability, to write those kinds of spiritually and philosophically influential stories ourselves.
Well said. 🙂 I especially agree with this:
By retreating into the ivory tower of Christian books written by Christians for Christians, we lose the ability to discern on a larger scale what kind of reading will best feed and deepen our own spiritual lives (and which books we are better to leave aside). We don’t have to worry about making moral decisions about what we read or when to stop reading, because we can trust “Christian fiction” to deliver something that is safe and palatable. (Never mind that the theology may be bad and the spiritual message of the book just as insidious and destructive as anything the world has to offer — witness the existence of books like “David and Bathsheba: A Royal Love Story”.)
R.J. this is a great comment. I especially agree with your point that Christian stories tend to make us LESS not MORE discerning. We want things cooked to the point that chewing is not required. As I’ve said elsewhere, somehow we’ve come to believe if it needs interpreting, it can’t be Christian.
Great, thought-provoking article, Mike. Thanks.
This reminds me of something I read a few years back, an interview with Eric Wilson on his (then) upcoming vampire trilogy, The Jerusalem’s Undead Trilogy. Reading what he said about Christian fiction (“I feel that if the only people that read my books are Christian, then I have failed”) got me wondering how to make a Christian book that’s not predictable and interesting enough to warrant attention from the mainstream audience. In fact, before Ted Dekker released his horror book Adam, I did feel like so much Christian fiction was pretty predictable, save for those rare authors that don’t ENTIRELY rely on formulaic writing. TL Hines, for example. I don’t recall a single person in any of his books being saved, yet I have no doubt at all that his books are Christian, so I feel dissappointed (right with him) that Christian don’t see the symbolism. Maybe, since many Christians are raised by this secular society (even if they went to solely Christian schools) are raised to see things too literally and not symbolically enough.
Now, I’ll agree that there are some dry Christian books, but, just like some of you already said, there are also terrible mainstream ones. It’s a mix in the bag, good Christian and nonChristian in one bag, and bad Christian and nonChristian in another. And only starting a year ago did I actually start bothering to read secular fiction, only to be confused (at first) of occassional use of Scripture and occassional use of God’s name-NOT in a blasphemous way either!-so it took a little bit of time for me to start to notice Messianic symbolisms in certain characters that were obviously not Christians.
So, overall, when it comes to Christian fiction, believe it or not, I’ve never wanted to read expecting people to be saved (at all), I was reading for a paradigm shift here or there and a nice twist as well. Ted Dekker and Eric Wilson definitely helped me love Christian there before I discovered many other great Christian authors (Mike Duran, Greg Mitchell, Brandt Dodson, TL Hines, Stephen R. Lawhead, just to name a few) that were just as great at writing as secular authors I’ve come to enjoy (Jasper Kent immediately comes to mind).
I think my frustration with the CBA is that some publishers seem unwilling to publish novels that are different–that don’t include the contrived “come to Jesus” moment but instead contain thought provoking, realistic characters that still fit the “guidelines” of the market (no swearing, sex, etc.) When discussing a novel that included elements of terrorism, Islam, and a European setting, I actually had a publisher say to me, “Christian readers aren’t global.” She stated that they are ethnocentric, tied to American regions, and set in their expectations of “sweet” characters. I think this is more of a reflection of the publisher’s perception of the readers than the readers actual willingness to welcome a “global” novel. Why not challenge the reader? One will never know until the publishers are willing to branch out from the current lines. The problem is that the publishers can justify their perceptions of the readers because they aren’t challenging the Christian reader to branch out and think beyond the contrived and cliche. This is why a whole lot of “Christian” readers I know don’t read “Christian” fiction at all.
The publishers’ perceptions of their readers comes from millions–yes, millions–of dollars invested in market research both active and de facto. They know who buys their books and why those books are bought. If a book doesn’t sell they don’t keep making others like it. Christian publishing is a business. Why do you think McDonalds doesn’t serve fried liver, even though there are people out there who really love to eat it?
That’s why all readers and most writers should be so excited about the paradigm shifts in publishing right now. We’re moving back to where publishing was 200 years ago. Small “presses” are able to put books they love into the marketplace without having to worry so much about underwriting a marketing behemoth. It’ll take us another 18-24 months to figure out ways to get the kinks worked out, but in the long run this is going to be so much better for those who love books. Continuing with the restaurant analogy, McDonalds (and the big houses) won’t go away. But they’ll become even more homogenous. If you want the sure thing you can always go there. But if you’re willing to take a chance on the little cafe that just opened down the street you might find something delicious.
Katherine, In this analogy, I’m writing fried liver.
KFC used to sell fried livers, but I’ve never seen it on their menu. I just knew that when I wanted them I could ask and get them.
I think the problem there is they are making educated guesses on what readers want. But they’re defined by two factors. What sells and what doesn’t sell. That’s how they make their educated guesses. What happens is their market has narrowed due to going based on those parameters.
They get negative feedback from bookstore managers who tell them why they are not going to carry a certain book. And often is is because one or two customers didn’t like something in the book, claiming it isn’t Christian. I’ve used to work in a bookstore and seen this dynamic in action. This isn’t a factor as much in general fiction, because the audience is so much larger and varied.
So this market has over time became narrower and narrower so that any “challenge” to them will be met with resistance. Because the readers you are referring to have long ago given up on finding stories they like in the Christian bookstore. They don’t go there, so they don’t influence that market to carry the more challenging books.
I’ve heard that is changing somewhat. With the advances of some indie publishers, and some authors doing well in the CBA that aren’t cookie cutter formats, it is expanding. But it is certainly a long way from being a big influence contrary to the main market that sells. And what sells and doesn’t sell is the defining criteria as to what the readers want.
My first thought upon reading this, Mike, was, “Well, duh.” lol. But I do think there is a lot here to shift through. Many have already touched on some things.
Like, on the didactic/preachy theme. Much Christian fiction is that way because that is what the Christian market expects/wants. By and large. There is a certain “guilt” if the didactic element isn’t there, that a good Christian is wasting their time unless they are learning something spiritual, gaining a new understanding of God, etc. Otherwise, fiction is a waste of time. This is why probably in a greater percentage of the overall Christian market, compared to the general, non-fiction so dominates. If you’re not improving yourself or enriching your walk with God, reading a “good story” is seen as a waste of time. Thus the need for Christian fiction to feel it has to justify its existence by being didactic.
And it has to be overt, because your run-of-the-mill Christian has been brought up on literal interpretation of Scriptures. For many, allegory is suspect, so there is little training or instruction for the average Christian on that means of interpreting Scriptures. As a result, that feeds over into other forms of writing. Unless the allegory is real blunt (like when a character in the novel is obviously a stand in for Christ with a different name), it goes right over the heads of average Christians. And if they don’t see the didactic element, they see it as a waste of time. It has to be blunt to justify its existence.
But as mentioned, this expectation throws a difficulty into the writing experience. Few authors are skilled at writing blunt Christian fiction that feels organic and natural, with real characters. It tends to create artificial people and dialog, or situations in a effort to force the story into a message, instead of the message into a story in a symbiotic relationship.
I also think the expectation in Christian fiction of someone getting saved is due to the nature of Christian fiction. Since romance is such a big seller, and that involves relationships, what is the real “climax” in Christianity? When someone gets saved. That’s the big moment.
Now, most genres have this in one form or another. In most stories, you know the protagonist will likely survive, no matter the odds. Yeah, some get killed off here and there, but readers of a good adventure don’t really *want* the main character to die. They want to see him or her overcome great odds and save the day, and win. The movies I didn’t like the most in past times is when the protagonist dies at the end, or loses the fight. They may be saying something worthwhile, but I don’t like it. It leaves me with a sense of loss, not hope. It is highly formulaic, good guy finds himself in impossible situation, nearly dies, but at the last moment, in a surprising way (the author hopes), they succeed and overcome the bad guy. Formulaic works, it’s just the details that change.
It just so happens that in Christian fiction, getting saved is that defining climatic moment. If not the climax of the book, certainly one of the sub-climaxes. Not because the Christian woman reading that romance novel needs to get saved, but because it makes them have that “yes!” climax moment. It deals primary with relationships in a Christian context, so naturally what is key in most of Protestant women reading those romances is the moment of salvation. Because that is what is important in a relationship to them (or at least purported to be so), then that is what they want to see happen. Same way when a space opera novel ends with the main character losing the battle and the “bad” guys winning. It may be more realistic, but it isn’t what people want to see happen when they pick up such a book. They know going in that the protagonist will win. It happens nearly every time.
And that leads into my last point. What the market wants and the believability of the story in large part depends on the particular reader’s experiences and expectations. And so they will *believe* certain things even if they aren’t “reality” simply because it conforms to their expectations.
Classic example, sitcoms. Those are the most unrealistic depictions of family life, or real life possible. I’ve never been in a group of people, family or friends, where we would make an audience laugh at least three to five times every minute of the day. Those shows often have more stereotypical characters to rival any novel you’ll ever read. But it “sells” because the audience expects there to be laughs every minute of the program. It is totally unrealistic, but it is what the audience wants based on what is popular. So that is what they get.
Same thing here. The CBA Christian market has for a long time wanted perfect characters and blatant Christian messages and seeing people get saved, and that’s what they’ve been given. It is the expectations of wanting an ideal to strive toward, a goal to pursue, to learn more about God, and to have that climatic moment which Christians generally consider the key point in one’s relationship to God, when they get saved, happen. This is how the Christian life *should* be, whether it really is or not.
It takes a very skillful writer to write that kind of story in such a way as to satisfy the expectations of both the Christian market and the non-Christian market, and not turn either off.
And that brings it back to your point. Is Christian fiction inferior than the general market as regards storytelling? I think the answer to that question depends a whole lot on what *your* expectations are. I imagine if you ask the generic CBA reader, they would say the Christian market stories are infinitely superior to the general market. Because it meets their expectations of what “good” fiction is. And their definition is decidedly not the one a reader in the general market would have. We’ve seen that difference evidenced in the comments already.
“A writer ought to be able to write from the heart and include his or her beliefs without force-feeding the reader. It’s impossible to write without infecting a work with the author’s world view. So why do so many think that they must stuff them into their works?”
Because so many are convinced that if they are not in “ministry” in a form that will be recognized and affirmed as such by the conservative church at large, they are (1) not fulfilling the great commission and (2) of the world. So they write to convert, all the more so because art is a suspect activity anyway. My Christian writing students overwhelmingly want to preach the gospel, and they’re overwhelmingly writing fiction.
Because the statement they’re most likely to remember about their Bible education is that “The Bible is literally true,” and they therefore give short shrift to symbolism in general.
Because they concentrate more on appearing religiously correct to others than on deepening their own reliance on the Holy Spirit. It’s a common stumbling block for any of us. On some level perhaps they know they aren’t as infused through and through with the essence of Christ as they need to be to be able to just write from the heart and have their worldview be there. So many Christians are not comfortable with “mysterious processes.”
Because publishers demand that this content be there. They aren’t selling books so much as tracts in a myriad of forms. As someone else mentioned, I did have an editor pretty much admit to me that most examples of a certain type of book they were putting out were artistically average at best, but they got published because they satisfied the content needs of the particular demographic that shops the Christian product stores.
Once I offered the belief on a message board that a writer’s worldview will out, which I do firmly believe, and another commenter told me I didn’t know what I was talking about. Because he, a very prolific writer and atheist, had dashed off a popular Christian fiction series for a major Christian publisher, nobody knew the difference, and he laughed all the way to the bank. So I’d hesitate to make the statement that all CBA fiction is being written by Christians.
I used to work for a Christian publisher. I know several authors who write for the CBA and are not Christians.
Sadly, I share the view that many Christian novels are unbelievable to life. I’m reading one now in which it seems like in every other sentence is the word “pray.” Granted, Christians pray. We should pray. But do we really pray that often? It makes the book seem horribly unrealistic, even in the fantastical genre it is aspiring to. It is precisely this lack of realism that drives me away from Christian fiction. I’m more likely to read secular than Christian fiction, and that is a terrible thing.
Charity: pick up Byzantium by Stephen Lawhead, or The Opposite of Art by Athol Dickson, or The Hound of Heaven by Doris Betts, or any of the Bugman mysteries by Tim Downs for some incredible Christian writer reading.
I agree that the quality of Christian fiction has improved dramatically over the last few years. And there are Christian books out there that really capture life realistically, but they are definitely in the minority. That’s one of the reasons I enjoyed Jane Kirkpatrick’s novel The Daughter’s Walk. It was based on real people and real events and I didn’t feel like the author sugarcoated anything. The protagonist did not have your stereotypical happy ending, which was very refreshing.
I think one of the difficulties in these sorts of conversations inside and outside the industry is terminology. Are we comparing “fiction written by Christians” with “fiction written by not-Christians” or CBA vs. ABA or Christian Romance vs. Other Romance? Obviously, if it’s the first thing, then there are incredible examples of “Christian fiction” with authors like Flannery O’Connor and Dostoevsky. I don’t think there’s a single modern genre where there’s not a decent Christian author writing in it. Literary (Robinson, Buechner, Berry), science fiction (Wolfe, Willis), even horror (Lumley), or mainstream popular thrillers (Grisham).
I am hopeful that there’s an increasing number of good writers popping up in the CBA, also.
All that to say… there are good writers and poor writers, regardless of religion, creed or spirituality. Certainly one of the key issues for us Christian writers to be aware of is the temptation to create wish fulfillment fantasy fiction in which the coming Kingdom has already arrived in its entirety (after a brief, mild struggle). The problem, obviously, is that it sells. It does. Which isn’t (frankly) primarily a problem with the publishers or the writers but with the appetites of our readers.
The main problem I have with Christian publishing is that I want to see less blatant Christianity and more latent Christianity. I’m torn between trying to market my work in progress to either a CBA or ABA agent/publisher because my work is emphatically not blatant Christianity. In fact, I’m afraid it may be a little too latent (but that’s what re-writes are for).
You nailed it with your final sentences: “So when someone suggests that Christian fiction is inferior to mainstream fiction, they need to clarify. If they mean that it’s poorly written, I think the charge is bogus. But if they mean it’s cliched and predictable, for the most part, I have to agree.”
The same could be said of other works in times past, for example, I’ve read a great number of science fiction books that started with a preface from the author that said: “Man may one day reach the moon…” In other words, books from the 50s. They tended to be cliche as well. Eventually they were able to shift into more plot and character driven stories that relied less on tropes and what sold well. I believe that Christian fiction will as well. It has to.
I agree with you, Mike. However, it’s not just the Christian readers who expect the fiction to be written a certain way, it’s the publishers as well. I think the time has come for the Christian publishers to widen their parameters.
One sentiment I’ve noticed echoed throughout the comments to this post is that one major reason Christian fiction is so bad is because so many Christian fiction writers hope to use it to fulfill the Great Commission, and that we need to stop using it as a ministry tool and begin offering it as entertainment. In a way, I think this is totally accurate. But I also think it’s completely inaccurate. Let me explain:
For one thing, I think it is totally accurate; but I think this is largely because of all the “high-pressure” ways evangelical Christians have created to “sell” the Gospel. We have the four laws for why people need Jesus. We have Gospel tracts we hand out to persuade people they need Jesus. We go to peoples’ homes, open our Bibles, and try to show them why they need Jesus. I remember going to a Halloween thing called the “99” a couple years back–you walk through this “haunted house” designed to show all the ways in which sin can affect you and steal your life. Then, just as you’re about to be “trapped” by the devil, an angel rescues you, you’re ushered into a room, and someone gives a brief speech before inviting you to say the sinner’s prayer. High-pressure all the way. Now to be fair, we’ve adopted this high-pressure approach because we’re passionate about seeing people come to Christ, and this is never a bad thing. I just don’t know how well it works. But it is this same high-pressure approach that’s channeled into Christian fiction.
A couple years back, however, I came across a new type of evangelism that’s really a very old type of evangelism, one clearly used by Jesus himself in the Gospels and one still used by rabbis: Rabbinic Questioning. Instead of answering a seeker’s question directly with a good, solid Biblical answer, you answer it with a question. And the point isn’t to annoy them (though you might :), but is rather to force them to examine their own views on life and where those views came from. This questioning process is supposed to make them more receptive to the Gospel; as they examine their own views, it makes them more receptive to examining the Gospel as well–and God invites them into fellowship with him. What if we “became as those apart from law” as Paul put it, and wrote fiction that may not be “Christian fiction” but that is still shaped by our worldview? Might God be able to use these stories to get readers to reflect on their own lives and make them more receptive to examining the Gospel? If they began examining the Gospel, God could certain further invite them into fellowship with himself.
Yes! Nathan, I think this is EXACTLY what Christian fiction should do. Instead of handing the reader pre-packaged, theologically approved answers, it should challenge the reader’s preconceptions, raise new questions they may not have considered, and invite them to think about those questions for themselves.
Does this mean running the risk that the reader will come up with the wrong answers, seeing in the story only what they want or expect to see? Yes, it does. Just as the Pharisees witnessed the miracles of Jesus and then attributed them to the power of Satan, it’s entirely possible for a book written out of a Christian worldview to be interpreted as liberal and humanistic (like the primary teacher who told her class, “The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe teaches us that we can ALL be lions!”).
But conviction and enlightenment are the work of the Holy Spirit, not of any human agency. Instead of pushing the “hard-sell” of four points and an altar call, or the literary equivalent, I believe we should ask the Lord to help us write stories that reflect the truths of Scripture in an organic and believable way — much like the parables He told, which confused the idle and unbelieving but drew those who were truly seeking to come to Him and ask for more.
And I keep coming back to C.S. Lewis, who attributed a large part of his conversion to reading George MacDonald’s PHANTASTES and being overwhelmed by the “fragrance of holiness” he found in that book. I read that novel as a Christian teen and couldn’t find much meaning in it — I much preferred the CURDIE books. But God used it powerfully to draw Lewis to Himself. Can’t we trust Him to use our books the same way?