There were a lot of great comments on last week’s thread about crime fiction writer Mark Bertrand and whether or not being published by a religious publisher limited his book sales. The responses were pretty much split, with lots of grey area in between.
I wanted to use a couple posts this week to address some peripheral topics that were broached last week.
One is the consistent use of Ted Dekker by Christian authors as “proof” of a certain POV.
It’s typical in conversations like the ones on that post, to hear Dekker referenced (as he was, at least half-a-dozen times). And why not? He’s one of the most well-known, successful, prolific Christian authors out there. But when did Ted Dekker become the remedy for everything that ails Christian fiction, the template for our success? And is he a good example of the real state of the industry? Nevertheless, supposedly…
- Dekker proves that male authors can sell books in the CBA.
- Dekker proves that horror and spec authors can sell books in the CBA.
- Dekker proves that “edgy” books can sell in the CBA.
- Dekker proves that marketing rests with the author.
- Dekker proves that Christian fiction can cross over.
- Dekker proves that author branding is essential.
- Dekker proves that Christian fiction is alive and well.
In the comments, D.M Dutcher theorized that Dekker’s success resulted from the fact that he
…seemed to fill A King/Koontz role in Christian fiction
J.L. Lyons played the “Dekker card” when he suggested that “the burden of responsibility for connecting to readers fall on [authors].”
I look at Ted Dekker and I see that he has built himself into a brand, not just with great books but with great marketing. He engaged actively with his fans back in those early days (and still does, to an extent) and built a solid following (“Dekkies,” I think they call themselves). There is something to be said for that. The author’s work doesn’t end at the contract, and most can’t depend on a single awesome book to skyrocket them to success. It takes time and effort, nose to the ground, to build your name into a brand. I’m sure he didn’t do all of it alone, but in the end no publisher or agent owns the Dekker brand. He does.
Heidi Glick expounded upon a “cross-over strategy”:
This article explains the strategy Dekker’s publisher uses for crossing over between audiences
Becky Miller was a little more pointed when she simply said,
I’m having a little bit of a disconnect here. So we’re saying Ted Dekker doesn’t sell well?
In the same way that a fantasy writer might reference J.K. Rowling or a romance writer Nicholas Sparks, Christians refer to Ted Dekker. Nothing wrong with that, right?
For a while now, I’ve felt that Ted Dekker is no longer a good example of the real state of the Christian fiction industry. Here’s four reasons why:
- Dekker entered the CBA market when it was expanding. The glut of authors vying for publication now, not to mention the changing publishing terrain, has changed the game.
- Dekker wrote in a genre that was in serious need of titles. At the time of Dekker’s Circle Series, speculative fiction and horror was an outlier in the Christian market. The genre has significantly expanded.
- Dekker captured a demographic that was not being addressed. The typical Christian target audience was older conservatives; Dekker aimed at the more youthful, hip reader, connected, and built a thriving community.
- Dekker has publishing momentum. He brings a built-in brand, platform, name value, and sellability.
None of this is meant to diminish Ted Dekker’s writing or accomplishments. He’s a good writer who’s worked hard and done due diligence to further his brand. More power to him. I wish him continued success and believe he’s a great voice for Christian writers.
However, I believe that Ted Dekker is no longer a good example of the real state of the Christian fiction industry.
I attended a writers conference a couple years back and spoke to a male Christian speculative writer who has published over a dozen books in the CBA. He was even nominated for a Christy Award one year, the most prestigious of Christian awards. This author has a good website. He speaks at conferences (as he was at that one). He has a fairly active social media presence. I asked him what his sense of the state of the Christian fiction industry was, particularly as it relates to spec-fic.
He was frustrated. Even though his books got good reviews, his sales were mediocre. In fact, he flat-out told me that he doesn’t believe Christian readers want to be challenged.
I believe this author is a better example of the real state of Christian fiction than is Ted Dekker.
Am I wrong?
You missed one other piece of what made Dekker sell — he co-authored two books with Bill Bright (“Blessed Child” and “A Man Called Blessed”), and that connected him to the college and younger generation focused Cru, with a name all the Cru staff recognized. 🙂
So unless a new author can replicate that marketing coup, we can’t really use him as an example. 😀
I think Dekker had already broken into the CBA before he published with Bill Bright, but yes, I think that probably did help to get the word out about his books. In many ways Tosca Lee publishing with Dekker has done the same thing for her.
But that’s the point, actually. When Christians get the word that there are stories in different genres, they’re willing to buy Christian fiction that is not romance or historical. They don’t look for it because they don’t know it exists.
If Christian publishers want to stand pat, they certainly can do that. But they should not say it’s the readers’ fault since the readers that would buy a Mark Bertrand book or a George Bryan Polivka book don’t know they exist.
Becky
Dekker’s first two books were the ones he co-wrote with Bright. His first novel with no co-writer was his third novel.
Thanks for the correction, Todd. I was going from memory when I heard Dekker speak at the Mount Hermon Christian Writers Conference years ago, and thought his solo contract came first.
Becky
Todd, you are mistaken. Dekker had three books published before Blessed Child was published. You forgot about the Matyr’s Song “trilogy”. And his “first” book was actually Showdown, but he didn’t get that book published until several other books were published. At least, on that last one, that is what I remember from something I had read at one time.
Two points:
First, Becky is on to something — no surprise there — in saying “they don’t look for it because they don’t know it exists.” To change that, you would have to focus intensely on sending a “this-is-not-your-grandma’s-fiction” message to Christian readers outside of CBA’s current orbit. (You would have to use those words, too: there’s no way to signal the change without owning the impression people have formed in the past.) Everybody admits there’s a perception problem. Some argue it’s only a perception, others think it mirrors reality. That’s a great debate to have in house, but until someone decides to ACT on the problem — to target non-CBA Christian readers meaningfully, rather than just throwing books out there and hoping for the best — it’s going to remain unchanged. Individual authors, whether they identify with the industry or not, won’t be able to do that heavy lifting on behalf of the industry.
Second, I think Mike should talk with Ted Dekker about the possibility of printing up some Dekker Cards for people to throw down. This is meme-worthy at the very least.
Precisely, Mark. I’ve heard for the last nine years about publishers trying a genre–by which they mean one author–and it didn’t work. If ECPA houses want to expand their market, they can–the Christian readers are out there. But it would take an investment and a purposeful strategy to bring in the Dekker readers (ooohh, I love playing that card 😉 ) so that they’ll buy from other authors as well.
I honestly hadn’t known that Dekker’s first contract was as a co-author with Bill Bright. I learned of this collaboration in this discussion, looked it up on line and found, apparently, one of several reprints.
I know of another debut author whose book catapulted into the limelight because of an endorsement by Josh McDowell. I think it was Karen Kingsbury perhaps, who first wrote with Gary Smalley, so even a romance/woman’s writer can get a bounce, apparently, from association with a trusted voice. Do I need to mention Jerry Jenkins/Tim LaHaye?
Of course most of us don’t have that opening, so there must be another way. And I agree that the publishers ought to do the heavy lifting–if they are serious about keeping their market from dying out.
Ah, yes, Dekker Cards. Mike could use the picture from this post. 😀
Becky
I think Ted’s a good example of what CAN be done in Christian fiction, and certainly an example of success in Christian fiction.
But if what we’re talking about is the state of the industry — as it stands for MOST writers, in general — then Ted Dekker is the EXCEPTION that defines the rule. That there IS a Peretti, that there IS a Dekker, shows that it’s -possible-, given the right set of circumstances, to make inroads in the CBA with spec fiction. That so few have managed to DO so, however, is the real picture.
I’d just be really wary of saying things like “Christian readers don’t want to be challenged”. I don’t know which author said it…but it was arrogant and dismissive. It’s like saying “These people are so dumb they are too stupid to get my books.”
That vibe comes across to a reader pretty clearly.
Ted Dekker is also the One. Most traditional publishers want exactly ONE crossover artist they can use as a placeholder in book retail to prove they can provide product in that space. Even if they don’t specialise in the genre they like to keep a spare romancer, a spare specficcer, a spare YA writer around. It’s even better if their spare sells well enough.
The very existence of Ted Dekker actually makes it HARDER for males who write spec fic to get a place onboard the train because Ted Dekker is “the one”. They don’t need any others.
Katherine’s statement: “The very existence of Ted Dekker actually makes it HARDER for males who write spec fic to get a place onboard the train because Ted Dekker is “the one”. They don’t need any others.”
Pretty much sums up how I feel about it.
I wonder if it came across with less arrogance when spoken in confidence to Mike. And I also wonder if that mystery author isn’t on to something. I think it’s worth pondering. I don’t even have the toenail clippings from my pinkie toe in the CBA though, so anything I think or say about the state of the CBA doesn’t hold a lot of weight.
Ted Dekker is indicative of a faithful faction which he played well. He continues to orchestrate that group and add more along the way. But typical of today’s CBA market or success? No.
I think Christian speculative writers have it particularly tough, and even tougher: fantasy novelists. For so long the CBA has been spewing “Fantasy doesn’t sell in Christian fiction.” So, for so long, Christians go elsewhere to find their reading.
Also, CF today doesn’t support any niche markets. Your case for J. Mark Bertrand who is a superb writer of crime fiction was a perfect example of that. It was so refreshing for a lot of us to pick up Mark’s work and devour it, and I thought Bethany House had committed a coup – expecting that kind of excellence/genre to appear from Thomas Nelson or Howard Books. (I know I get repetitive concerning this genre, but it’s the same with romance novels. Any romance novels which get close to portraying the real picture get shut down because of the staid demographic they cater to.) And, yes, there are exceptions, but few.
One thing that is somewhat typical, oddly enough, about Ted Dekker and the CBA is the thriller genre. There’s a great deal of horror within that genre, but it’s grisly serial-killer type horror, not necessarily Stephen King type of horror, i.e. Steven James’ Patrick Bowers Series. Robert Liparulo includes some horror in his high-tempo thrillers. CBA seems to tolerate this in its limited doses from certain authors who’ve managed to sell well.
And I don’t think we can neglect to discuss the obvious: CBA only markets its bestsellers well. They do little – and seem to show somewhat of an inability – to market their other authors. Is there anything more difficult that marketing fiction?
Most people don’t want to play the spiritual card, but there is that. If, as authors, we recognize God’s plan for us and implement it, what else can we do?
I agree that Ted Dekker is not a good example of the state of spec-fic in the CBA. But I think that goes across all markets and genres. Deeanne Gist is not a good example for what ALL writers of historical romance can expect in terms of sales: like Dekker, she was writing a particular brand of fiction when the market was expanding (though I freely admit that the hist-romance market is far far larger than Christian spec-fic.) Amanda Hocking is not an indication of the success every self-published author can or will have.
Publishing in general follows a long-tail distribution: a few authors make most of the money. (In fact, it goes that way for all markets and products… the #2 brand in any market typically has half the sales of the #1 brand. #3 brand has less than half the sales of #2.) Like the infomercials say: Results not typical. Your experience may vary.
Okay, Mike, I’ll stop playing the “Dekker card.” (goes into corner with dunce cap). In my defense, that comment was in reply to one that had already referenced Dekker. And kudos to the commenter that mentioned his collaborations with Bill Bright. I hadn’t thought of that and can definitely see how it probably jump-started Dekker’s career.
You’re right that he came up in a different time. But I still think it is valuable to look at those who have been successful and ask why. You raise some good points to answer that question, but I hesitate to say we can’t see him as an example.
No author can recreate everything that led to another’s success. There is something to be said for having the right product in the right place at the right time. But still, authors should be doing whatever they can to give themselves the best chance possible. We can’t expect a publishing house to do everything for us.
Also, as an aside, I was struck by some of the comments from some CBA publishing reps that bemoaned the state of bookstore buying. Seems to me that they should begin going around those bookstores if they want to see success in these genres. You have to find your customers where they are, and if they aren’t in CBA bookstores its time to try something else.
We have the technology… 🙂
J.L., that was not meant as a put-down in any way. Your comment on that post was great. In fact, I’m going to use the second half of it in my next post.
Thanks, Mike. I didn’t take it that way. Always enjoy the discussions here, though when it comes to some topics I’m much too scared to get involved. I think you know the ones.
Or too wise to get involved.
I agree that Dekker should be looked at as an outlier and not the template. He leveraged social media when it was in its infancy. Much of the “correct” way to establish a platform and persona could be credited to Dekker. Also–and I say this as a Dekker fan–much of his recent work is essentially secular fiction (as evidenced by its publishing through Center Street instead of Hachette’s Faithwords division). That said, the real problem with the sales for speculative, Sci-fi, fantasy, etc is on the heads of the publishers and more importantly the bookstores. As mentioned by Nicole above, writers like Steven James and Robert Liparulo write thrillers that sell well in the secular market when placed in the mainstream sections as opposed to the “Christian” or “Inspirational” sections. It may be that these authors have found the solution and the problem–male readers generally don’t expect to find powerful male-oriented fiction buried between Amish and Prairie romance in a store filled with nick-knacks. Our books would do much better in a comic book store or in a Barnes & Noble in the genre sections where they belong.
I’ve never made it through a Dekker book. I don’t know what’s wrong with me.
I’ve only read Three. 😉
Nothing. And be glad–it’s the endings of his books that are the worst parts…
The very end of Showdown was a little weak, but I enjoyed the book otherwise. He’s a master at depicting evil, particularly how it eats away at the human spirit. I read (most of) Black and that one stuck with me. It’s very surreal. But, can’t please everyone I guess.
I’m stuck on this line: “In fact, he flat-out told me that he doesn’t believe Christian readers want to be challenged.”
Can I put in a word for readers (both Christian and non-Christian) who don’t read fiction to be “challenged”? If someone tells me a novel “challenged” them, I might probe a bit more about the book, but my initial instinct is one of rejection. (I have yet to read “The Shack” for that very reason). And it’s not because I don’t want to be challenged, but because I read non-fiction that challenges me. I read fiction to get lost in the lives of the author’s characters. If I end up being challenged, that’s fine, but it had better come as result of having first captured my attention because it was a compelling story with great characters and solid writing. I think you’ll find that true in the ABA world as well.
I agree with this. I don’t read to be challenged, I read to be entertained. Sadly, a lot of Christian fiction is neither challenging nor entertaining. I think the problem goes beyond what I’m about to say, but a large part of it is: A lot of Christian Speculative stuff is mediocre at best.
Beyond that, I think the success of films like The Conjuring seem to show there’s definitely an audience for Christian Speculative Fiction. . .and I’d assume there’s an equally large audience for Crime Fiction. They’d probably find a little more success in CBA if they weren’t shelved in their own “Christian Fiction” section. Who is in charge of that, exactly? The stores or the publisher?
I see and appreciate Nick’s point. However, I’m not sure I correctly interpret the statement by that unnamed author when he says that he doesn’t believe Christian readers don’t want to be challenged. Did he mean, broadly, that he believes Christians who love one particular genre don’t care to be prodded/stretched into trying other genres? Or did he believe we believers don’t want books that cause us to rethink our beliefs and lifestyles? Or did he mean we don’t want convoluted plots and obscure references that make understanding the tale a challenge? Although I can enjoy a variety of genres, I don’t specifically seek a “challenge” in my fictional entertainment. That said, though, any story that can open my mind to fresh ideas or change me for the better will rate higher on my list of good reads.
Let’s put it this way; Christian Spec fic is the Archie Comics of the spec fic world. When a cutting edge small press is daring because they publish humorous fantasy and steampunk, something’s up.
Archie Comics never really challenge anyone by the standards of comics. They are profitable enough to keep going-someone must be buying all those digests you see in grocery stores. Some people will admit to liking them, and sometimes they aren’t all that bad. But apart from oddities like Archie Vs. the Punisher, the point of them is not to challenge anything, because they are locked into their base who likes them for what they are. Archie still publishes Sonic the Hedgehog comics for heaven’s sake, and they started when the first game came out in the nineties.
I think this is what may be meant by that author. I mean, the genre is still leery about using fictional magic, and only now have they accepted superheroes.
I’ve never picked up a Dekker book. Also, even though the industry seems to have expanded, the issues are still the same. Until the issues are addressed, I can’t believe it will get better.
I’m sitting here looking at the Ted Dekker book on one of the many TBR piles in my house. Will I actually read it? I’ve read some of his other books, and did not like them, because I don’t like novels written in sentence fragments. Style aside, they’re kinda okay.
Mike (snaps fingers here)! Will you write something controversial here about my novel coming out on the thirtieth? (It) Should be easy for you, like shooting fish in a barrel.
I believe that author you talked with is right. Recently, I’ve been noticing a frequency of people rating pretty good Christian speculative fiction very low and claiming they’re not Christian just because they’re either edgy or go against some doctrine they believe in. It seems like most conservative readers are too comfortable and laxed in where they are to want to be challenged. Sadly, my own mother is a good example. Aside from a few scarce authors that I enjoy, she won’t go for anything that’s not a Christian book that’s a light read, and has questioned me before about why I read some of the things I read. I’m no longer content with “clean”, “light”, “family-friendly” reads. Though some of them are nice for a relaxer, I prefer the heavily edgy stuff.
Ted Dekker is published by Hachette. He’s not CBA, certainly not exclusively.
The idea that Ted Dekker isn’t a “CBA” author is disingenuous. He broke in as a writer with Thomas Nelson. His earliest successes—Blink, Three, the Circle Trilogy and later Green—were all published by TM.
His trilogy with Tosca Lee—the last book just releasing this June–is published by FaithWords, Hachette’s “inspirational” imprint. Are they members of the Evangelical Christian Publishing Association? Not sure, but they’re not shying away from their Christian focus since they offer a “Christian e-newsletter” on their website.
In 2009, though he continued to publish with Thomas Nelson, Dekker started published with Center Street, Hachette’s general market imprint. But he’s also publishing ebooks. That does not negate the fact that he’s traditionally published. So, too, his general market books do not negate the fact that he has been, for the bulk of his career, a CBA author.
Now, the point is this: if those commenters who said the Christian market only wants romance and historical are right, Ted Dekker should not have become a best selling author selling thrillers and supernatural and speculative fiction. But he did. Under the watch of the CBA. Publishing with a CBA house. That “exception” cannot be explained while still holding to the idea that the Christian market only wants romance and historicals.
Becky
Not disingenuous in the slightest. We are talking about CBA publishing. Dekker doesn’t currently publish as CBA – certainly not exclusively. Dekker is a better case of the utility of flavoring your traditional publishing with CBA, or combining CBA strange fiction mediocrity with traditional or self-publishing or something.
He is a lousy exemplar of how to “succeed in the CBA” currently.
This is where the confusion is: is this post about success in the CBA only or success as a Christian novelist? The second one is a much different scenario than the 1st, and Dekker is only decent as an example of the latter.
sdpaul, what Dekker is doing now does not negate what he did before. He published with best-seller success in the CBA.
You’re missing my point, apparently. I “played the Dekker card” in Mike’s previous post to point out a fallacy in what some of the commenters were saying–i.e., CBA publishers don’t need to change because they are reaching the Christian market which only wants romance and historicals. If the Christian market in truth only wanted romance and historicals, then Ted Dekker, writing thrillers and supernatural and speculative fiction, would not have become a best selling author. But he did. Under the watch of the CBA. Publishing with a CBA house. Hence the “Dekker card” ought to explode the myth that Christians only want one certain kind of writing, that men no longer read fiction, that genres which appeal to a younger crowd can’t be successful.
Becky
Ted Dekker uesd faith in his book.you got read story to get full meaning.I love how he wrote and make me think
He is one best Christian author.
Also, Koontz is Christian, so I think it probably helps to clearly identify when you are talking about the CBA and when you are talking about Christian writers.
Christianity (or its non-secular derivatives) are no barrier to weird authors. Dekker, Koontz, Orson Scott Card, Danielle Steele, Anne Rice, etc. all claim some variety of Christian adherence, and I bet if you looked at the top 100 selling authors in nearly any genre, you’d find Christians representing themselves at or around demographic standards.
The problem comes with the CBA – an association of Christians formulated around a perceived economic demand for exclusively Christian-oriented non-fiction and fiction. I don’t see the economic need for the CBA to enter (seriously, and not just a few temporary test lines) into genres whose returns in traditional publishing are dwindling.
What is the CBA’s unique selling proposition? Can they offer a type of science fiction, for example, that is superior to what Tor produces 40 times a month? I think it is certainly possible to do so, Tor – the leading sci-fi publisher – makes its money off of reprints from the 80s, media tie-ins and knock-offs. One would imagine that a publisher who produced interesting, hard science fiction that wasn’t beholden to the conformist oatmeal currently being churned out would sell a fair number of books.
But is that the CBA’s economic problem? Do they really need to invest in any genres that they aren’t known for? Most Christians (spec-fic fans, that is) will sort through Tor’s heap-o-crap all month, and never give Family Christian a second thought (when they are looking for spec-fic. They’ll go there for other reasons.) Because Tor cranks the stuff out, they know they’ll probably find something at the regular bookstore, where at least there is still a (completely mangled, but existent) Sci-fi/Fantasy section.
Family Christian doesn’t even have a Sci-fi section online. That’s how uncommitted they are to the genre. I don’t blame them. There’s just no way for folks like R.A. Lafferty – whose Fourth Mansions was nominated for the Nebula – to even find a sales niche in the CBA. It would make no sense for either party.
Everyone wants to point the blame. Some at publishers, some at readers, some at bookstores. They all play a part to some degree, but the results you are seeing really results from the nature of the beast.
When I did bookkeeping for a Christian bookstore (part of the Logos Bookstore franchise) back in the 90s, the owner liked to stock new an interesting titles. He stocked items he knew weren’t big sellers because he liked theology and exposing people to it.
He carried this one magazine which he enjoyed as well. It was satirical. Some of our patrons didn’t get it. They felt it was of the Devil and demanded he remove it. He struggled over it, because he didn’t want to decide his inventory based on what a few people didn’t like. But in the end, he knew word of mouth at churches that had accounts with the store could sink it. He took it off the shelves.
That wasn’t the only example. Problem is, if you have “Christian” in the name, you automatically subject your operation to theological scrutiny. Due to the diversity of theological opinions, often believed as the gospel truth, a Christian bookstore is going to be drawn down to the loudest complainers. They can’t afford to carry content perceived by a church or group as evil and expect to survive.
This causes Christian publishers to have a hard time finding bookstores who will stock much fiction, especially since there is a big enough group of Christians who believe fantasy and sci-fi are of the devil. And if a book gets noted for having magic or drinking or….name it, a bookstore will be forced to not carry it. This also causes the bookstore owner to shy away from riskier titles, which except for a few authors/titles, spec. fiction tends to hit the buttons of the complaining crowd.
These same people don’t go to B&N and complain about books in their Christian section. Christian nor secular readers, even if they complained to B&N about a title, are not likely to pose the same threat of lost sales. This isn’t a dynamic you’ll find in non-Christian stores.
This is not to blame the readers as a whole. It isn’t that there aren’t lots of Christians who enjoy fantasy and sci-fi to make a viable market. It is simply the dynamics of enough churches and Christians who hold to certain beliefs that have the power over bookstores labeled “Christian” to keep their selection into a narrow market considered safe for that audience.
Because of this dynamic, Christian publishers hands are tied. They’d like to find the next Dekker, but since their primary distribution channel is to Christian bookstores trying to keep their most vocal critics happy, that’s going to be a very hard sell. Instead, they are left with the options self-publishers and small-press authors normally deal with: selling on-line. Because that’s a long-tail model and not the “produce model” that bookstore sales are working with (a book has to prove its worth taking up valuable shelf space or it gets returned in 2-6 months). They don’t see the number of sales that they normally would. Consequently, they aren’t eager to take manuscripts like spec-fic due to its high risk factor.
So over the years, Christian readers know Christian bookstores as good places to get Bibles, non-fiction, and maybe the latest hot-selling Christian romance title, or a gift, but that’s about it. Christians who want to read fantasy and sci-fi look elsewhere.
I think the only way that will change, if it ever does, is if those churches and groups who see certain elements of fiction as evil diminish in number enough to no longer constitute a “vote” of significance at the local Christian bookstore. I don’t see that happening.
He carried this one magazine which he enjoyed as well. It was satirical. Some of our patrons didn’t get it. They felt it was of the Devil and demanded he remove it. He struggled over it, because he didn’t want to decide his inventory based on what a few people didn’t like. But in the end, he knew word of mouth at churches that had accounts with the store could sink it. He took it off the shelves.
I’m guessing it was the Wittenburg Door (yes, spelled incorrectly) – and that’s exactly why trying to “break out” with freak writing in the CBA is just silly. That magazine was hilarious – better than pretty much anything secular…and it was just a lightning rod for little old ladies who weren’t the target market anyhow. If you are a Christian who writes freak fiction of any sort, there are plenty of existing outlets to sell through. Don’t try to sell through the local plumber’s union, don’t try to sell through the nursing home, and if you can get it in the CBA, great, but seek the bulk of your readers elsewhere.
Freaks don’t frequent Family Christian, and when they do…it’s not to find freak fiction.
Of course, there’s room for “cozy freak” but that is definitely a sub-sub genre. Weird and gentle, and not too weird. Mostly YA stuff. I’m not thinking of those authors, but the wider band of freak writers.
The CBA was not formed because the C.S. Lewises of the world didn’t have an outlet, but because evangelists needed a publishing organization to distribute the Word of God and the Gospel.
Bonnet fiction brings them money that funds the mission. Freak fiction does not. That’s the end of it. This is a question of economics, not theology. Bonnet fiction’s legalism is as questionable in its theology as freak fiction is in its liberalism…but the CBA does not exist to promote bonnet fiction, but to profit from it.
The purpose of the CBA:
improve business conditions for Christian retail
The purpose of the ABA:
Promote independent bookselling
These are wildly different business purposes. If the CBA existed to promote Christian bookselling, you might have an argument.
But it is like expecting IBM to really care about selling pencils. Wrong product, wrong distributor…a bad match.
I don’t really see why spec fic and thrillers are considered “freak” writing. I mean, we’re talking basic spy novels, police procedurals with any amount of violence, soft and hard SF, horror, and fantasy in general types. I can’t see this being viewed as “freak” writing unpalatable to Christians who like to shop at explicitly Christian places.
If it is, though, we have a lot of issues about the kind of culture protestant evangelicalism has created that we should worry about before books.
Oh, yes. We definitely do have issues about that culture which was created, and we should worry about it. Or, since we aren’t supposed to “worry”, we should look at it, examine it, and change it.
Mike, I’m afraid I’ll continue to “play the Dekker card” when it trumps a generalization by pointing out that it can’t be true. That’s what exceptions do. Some commenters were saying Christian fiction isn’t broken because they’re reaching their market with the genres that market wants. As if no readers are buying Ted Dekker books.
Is Dekker “typical”? Of course not. No one is saying he’s typical–at least not as I understood the comments. But he does beg the question when it comes to what Christians want to read. How can we say Christians only want romance and historical when Ted Dekker sells more than any writer in those genres? It isn’t logical. So sorry, the Dekker card remains firmly up my sleeve. 😉
Becky
But as xdpaul points out, Dekker’s not in the CBA. He sells there, sure. But he’s published by Hatchette as a crossover. Using him as your trump card is like using Koontz or Veronica Roth
Katherine, as I just commented to xdpaul, Dekker became a best-selling author while he was publishing with Thomas Nelson. Surely that wouldn’t have happened if Christian readers only want romance and historicals.
Becky
An exception can’t trump or disprove a generalization. By definition, a generalization says there are exceptions, but the point is generally true. If Mike had claimed that no Christians wanted to buy and read Christian horror, thrillers, crime/mysteries, then an exception would prove the statement was using a generalization as absolute truth. But an exception can’t prove that a generalization isn’t a valid generalization, which by definition says there are going to be exception.
Rick, I wasn’t actually interacting with what Mike said as much as I was with the commenters who said the CBA was reaching their target market so why should they change and add a genre like mystery. My point was, apparently there’s a much bigger part of the market that their romances and historicals aren’t reaching, or Ted Dekker could never have become a best-selling author. Clearly he proves that the Christian market could be much broader than it is.
Becky
Before I bash the industry to much let me ask what is being preached in pulpits and Sunday schools about speculative fiction and fantasy writings? I have been hearing from Pastors and teachers about “the evils of fantasy” and really the evils of any type of fictional story. Last Sunday I was talking to a young man (early to mid 20’s) about the books we liked and he mentioned he liked the dreaded and loathed Harry Potter. One lady about took mine and the poor guys head off yet. If this is the attitude in the body of Christ it is no wonder that CBA or any Christian group is hesitant to publish any speculative or fantasy novels.
I always hate hearing these stories, because I know they must happen often. Unfortunately those who believe fiction is “evil” do a great disservice to their congregations. For me, reading fiction is entertainment, yes, but it is also a practice in empathy. To get inside a character’s head (best case, one who is not exactly like me) and experience life in his(or her) shoes is an experience you can get no other place.
I wonder if that wasn’t actually the meaning behind the comment in the post about Christian readers not wanting to be challenged: not that we should want our faith to be assaulted or cast in doubt, but that we are encouraged to see life from a different perspective.
If more people in the church read this “challenging” fiction, we might all find ourselves better people. Just my two cents. I wrote a blog about this, which you can view here: http://jllyon.com/2013/08/04/is-reading-fiction-a-complete-waste-of-time/
We’re still dealing with the legacy of the eighties satanic panic scare. You can trace those attitudes back to then. It’s funny now in the age where geek culture is seen as popular, but I remember owning books which had people chastising the occult roots of Star Wars, or watching people get absolutely crazy over D&D then as a vessel for satanic influence.
From what I’ve read Dekker’s goal was always to get out of the Christian market and go mainstream. The Christia books was always a way to get name recognition it seems. He has never considered himself a Christian writer, but rather a writer who happens to be a Christian. One could say this is semantics but there is a subtle but huge difference in my opinion. As I’ve followed his career and it’s struggles I’ve become convinced that I would never approach a Christian publisher with my work even if it somehow seems to fit in. Thankfully, I don’t have to worry about publishers and agents and all those hurdles any longer. I’ve decided anything I publish will be in ebook format and self pubbed. Problem solved. Success or failure is all in my hands in shared by someone else.
Dekker believes Christian readers don’t want to be challenged – given the glut of Amish fiction, he’s probably right for a large portion of the market. I don’t object to being challenged, but still find Dekker a bit out there for my tastes. And a lot of the time I am simply reading to be entertained. I want light and fluffy. I don’t want a book that I’m going to have to finish before bed simply so I can sleep.
And, by the way, Nicholas Sparks writes women’s fiction, not romance (that’s what he says). In order for a book to be classified as a romance it has to have a happy-ever-after ending (according to Romance Writers of America), which Sparks doesn’t. Nora Roberts would be a better example. But it’s ok for you not to know that – romance isn’t exactly your specialty genre, is it?
Maybe he, deep down, is just sharing God’s Love. A Love that is worth sacrificing for!
Ted Dekker is one the best. I love his books and have read most of them.I have find my faith to have grow from them.Each preson is different and those who do not read can keep their opinion about his books to them self. They make you think and see faith is different way.I lrean Bibles versus and understand some god more.
I”m a published writer with a smaller publisher. I write Christian fantasy-adventure books like Lord of the rings, only I’m not even close to being as good as Tolkien.
I think there’s a lot of elements involved in readers and writers.
1) it’s hard to market and get your books under the noses of the readers even if you’re with the big wig publishers. You’d think with the expansion of Social Media, we could sell books like hotcakes. But no, it’s a lot harder than one thinks!! It’s an art onto itself that one has to study just like writing the novels.
2) People are bored, period! They are bored with society, with social media, with life, with churches, bored with the news channels, with streaming media, TV, and with books. They want to escape and follow a hero they can relate to on his/her adventure. They want the adventure to be their adventure.
3) Some readers HATE formulas and the same old, same old books as yesterday. One thing I’ve noticed about larger Christian publishers is that they have formulas that they follow and every single writer MUST follow them. I stay with my smaller publisher b/c she allows me to write just about anything I want except for glorifying of biblical sinful acts. Larger Christian publishers make us follow formulas that some readers dread. A woman is raped and in the next chapter she is super fine and has no troubles at all. Um …… A city is taken over by an enemy and the character is super fine when their family is slaughtered. Um ….. The Christian is super perfect in all their ways. No cursing under their breath, no jealousy, no acting like Peter in the bible who thankfully stuck his foot in his mouth at every turn. No coming back to Jesus in tears and asking the High Priest to clean them off. No trying to do better. No seeking God’s face. Nope, the character is super perfect in all their ways. Sadly, this is what the larger publishers want, but not what some readers want. I love characters who struggle in their prayer times, wonder if Jesus really does love them, try to smack the coworker in the face when they steal an idea, or struggle with forgiveness.
I’m reading the Hiding Place by Corrie Ten Boon and I’m amazed to see God move in her life is such strong ways and yet she’s blind to it. That’s the type of christian book I want to read. But again, the religious crowd will scream Heresy to any spiritual move of God and thus others back off of it. Who cares what these people say about it??
I’ve learned is to write what I want to read. I have two types of people who read my books. One group are my fans and love my books; the other group are folks who give snarky remarks about my books. Whatever. I won’t change the books to please the snarkies. Too bad, so sad! Don’t read the books. This is why I say to Christian writers either self publish or go with smaller publishers who will allow you to do write what you love. Beware of the larger ones who put bridles on your writing.
I personally believe books will make a comeback as TV is now boring, Netflix, Hulu, and other streaming websites have nothing to watch, social media is toxic and the only thing left are books. But we need to stop using formulas and write what YOU want to read. Learn the craft of writing, learn to the rules, then learn to break them gracefully, not clumsy. Listen to criticism and if more than 3 people say the same thing, then you need to change it.
Ted Dexter is good b/c he writes what he wants to read but can’t find it. He’s learned the craft of writing and he using it as a tool. He fell in love with his genre and he woos it like a lover. His characters are REAL people who live in his head and he talks to them. That is what we need to learn to do. Woo the writing as a lover.
I personally write b/c I love the adventures and I want to see what happens next. I have fans who feel the same way. Fall in love with writing and stop worrying about how many books you sell. Build it and they WILL come. Why? Because readers are hungry for an adventure and for God. It’s ok if you sell just one book to one reader who is hungry for what you write and become your fan as opposed to selling books to 100,000 people who will just read your book and toss it into the Goodwill pile. I think we look at the numbers way too much. Write b/c you love the art.
Sorry, I meant: Want to smack the coworker. not try!! LOL!
I use to be a big dekker fan and even now it’s hard to not want catch up on some of the books I’ve missed like AD 30 and AD 33 it sounds like such a great book but then some of his books give me this feeling that dekker is pushing a new age progressive type of Christianity where your experience becomes you own truth. So I wouldn’t recommend other authors going this route.