My friend Mike Duran, who is also one of the members of a small writing group I belong to, periodically brings up discussions about the quality of Christian fiction. He did so again yesterday in his blog article “Is Christian Fiction Really Inferior To Mainstream Fiction?”
At times I have felt wearied by the topic because it seems like a re-tread, but actually this go round is different. For one, Mike’s views seem to have evolved (or maybe I misunderstood his earlier position). Now he recognizes that Christian fiction is not synonymous with bad writing:
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. (emphasis in the original)
Yea, yea, yea!!! 
The other reason I’m not grinding my teeth or lobbing word-bombs in Mike’s direction (not that I would, Mike. No, never! 
) is because a part of me agrees with what he’s saying. A part of me.
His thoughts stem from an article he linked to about Christian fiction — “Diluted Reality,” which appeared several months ago in Online Journal of Christian Communication and Culture, a periodical containing articles by students at Moody Bible Institute, developed as a project of the course “Biblical Perspectives of Media and Culture.” The essence of that piece and Mike’s is that Christian fiction needs to do a better job of telling the truth. Plastic characters and sugarcoated endings make the stories shallow.
Who can argue with that? They do. They definitely do. And, yes, I’ve read Christian fiction that could be characterized by those elements. However, I’ve read a growing number of books that are far from this description, which brings me to the points in Mike’s article with which I disagree.
He suggests that reading more Christian fiction to find out whether it is all plastic and predictable isn’t the answer because it simply is — readers want it that way.
First, I don’t believe making such a determination by reading a small sampling is accurate. I could read Nancy Drew books and conclude that all general market fiction is shallow, cliched, and predictable.
Certainly there are genres within Christian fiction that do not aim for more than sweet romance. Is romance predictable? In the same way that mysteries are, yeah! Readers don’t read a romance in hopes that the guy and girl never get together! A certain amount of predictability is built into the genre.
The stories that go beyond a genre trope, however, are the ones that take on a new dimension. Are no Christian novels aiming for more than the predictable, and succeeding? I know there are more and more authors who are breaking from the mold. Like the change in craft (and I think there are still books that need work in that area), the change in depth is happening.
Which brings me to the second point. Mike believes the publishers believe readers like bad books. Or at least bad endings. Isn’t that precisely what a predictable, cliched ending is?
I disagree that readers are satisfied with such stories. I think they would be delighted to find high quality, well-written books that aren’t “edgy” or “gritty” or whatever the latest label is for books that push the envelop of Christian mores.
Why can’t good books be about the struggles Christians face? For example, is it unrealistic to have a story about a high-profile athlete who is an outspoken Christian, and who stays true to his faith in spite of the temptations swirling around him? Since men like Tim Tebow, Drew Brees, and Jeremy Lin are living that story, I tend to think it’s quite realistic.
The skilled writer would be the one who tells such a story in a way that is not predictable, cliched, or peopled with plastic characters.
I have a hard time imagining that readers would be disappointed because the characters seemed too real or that the ending surprised them. In short, if Mike is right, and publishers are purposely putting out books that are shallow because they think those are the ones readers want, I’d say they are underestimating their audience. And no wonder their demographic seems to be quite narrow. They’re going after those most willing to give up quality for morality — moms.
That, by the way, is a compliment to moms. Moms are the gatekeepers of many a home. Because they have that role, however, they should not have to choose shallow stories. It’s not right to suggest that’s what they prefer when they haven’t been offered much else.
Fortunately, the shallow story is going the way of the poorly crafted story, and I applaud the writers, agents, and editors who are aggressively going after quality on all levels. They are out there, in growing numbers.
I’ve read more than a few books by Christian authors lately that weren’t exactly trite and predictable evangelical pap. ‘Neeta Lyffe, Zombie Exterminator’ and ‘Night of the Living Dead Christian’ spring to mind.
Some readers want predictable, though. My mom reads Harlequin romances by the bucket-load, as well as their ‘Love Inspired’ sappy-Christian line.
In the past Christian fiction has been aimed at those rare Christians who did a lot of book-shopping in Evangelical bookstores, perhaps because they had been taught that reading ‘worldly’ novels was a sin.
In the internet age a greater percentage of Christians are coming in contact with Christian fiction, including Christian readers who have never read anything besides books from a safely secular publisher. In addition new self-publishing technology means that Christian authors can challenge the Christian publishing norms and still be (self-) published.
Who knows where this will lead?
Loved this post.
Like you, my perspective in response to Mike’s post was longer than a comment…posting on Thursday.
I agree, some of the strongest advocacy I’ve seen for change comes out of the industry itself. It’s just a relatively new niche, and it’s still growing.
There’s quite a few Christian novels out there that indie authors have written, including myself, but most of it is End Times fiction or fiction set in Tribulation times. Scars by Patience Prentice for one. There’s also fiction based off of the Old Testament, like People of the Ark by Vaughn Heppner.
I tried writing outside of my faith, and it really hasn’t worked for me, so I published my first purely Christian fiction novel last month, called Times of Trouble. I generally read outside of Christian fiction, mostly because until I started publishing my works, all I thought it consisted of was the romance novels and the Left Behind series, which I have read. I even worked in a library for a time and had no idea Frank Peretti and Ted Dekker were Christian novelists.
Mike’s conclusion bothered me a little. As some of the commenters observed, it seemed dismissive and condescending toward Christian fiction readers, even though I’m sure that wasn’t his intent. *If only we weren’t hobbled by these unsophisticated readers who don’t know enough to demand quality! This is why we get no respect!*
For a writer to complain about the tastes of his chosen market seems a bit disingenuous. Christian fiction is a niche market. If you write for a niche market, you get niche market readers with very particular preferences, and the general market is going to perceive you as a niche writer. Thank God you have a market at all and _own_ it. If you feel restricted from writing the gritty, realistic fiction you feel is necessary to gain respect from the larger literary world and preserve your integrity as a writer, you need to go to the general market with those gritty, realistic, literary stories. Lose the explicit Christian agenda and the spec-fic trappings and write *serious* fiction.
I think the deeper problem is that most Christian authors can’t resolve the identity issue: “Am I a Christian fiction writer, or a Christian who writes fiction?” It feels safest to stay inside the fishbowl we’ve created and write familiar, unchallenging stories that our friends and family will approve of. It feels good to get positive strokes from people who share our worldview. However, if we’re going to simultaneously fuss about lack of recognition, we need to also venture into the general market with well-crafted, innovative, relevant stories that breathe our faith rather than try to sell it.
As C.L. notes, Christian fiction isn’t just a niche, it’s a *new* niche and still maturing. I agree with all of you that the overall quality level is improving, but we will likely see no books deemed “classics” for many years, probably written by authors with lengthy literary pedigrees and recognized as such only after they’re dead. Classics by definition are stories that stand the test of time, and you can’t hurry that along.
Fred, thanks for reading my post. I only wish you would have commented there! I’m interested that you think “compaining” about the Christian fiction market is “disingenuous.” In what way? The answer always seems to be, “Quit griping and go to the ABA.” So if I did, would I then be able to be critical of the CBA without being disingenuous? Not sure I get that. Or are you really suggesting that markets are amorphous and above reproach, Anyway, I’d like to use your comments here for a follow-up post if you don’t mind. Maybe a day or two.
Nissa, I agree — the changes in the publishing industry have stirred the pot and it’s hard to know what the traditional publishers will end up doing. It seems from some small signs that some are trying to stretch their reach while others are holding fast to service their core following. Will the first group succeed? They have more competition than ever, as you pointed out. But will the second succeed, given that the demographic they count on is shrinking? Only God know.
Sally, thanks for feedback. Always appreciated.
Becky
Note to self: Avoid stupid words that don’t communicate.
Mike,
“Disingenuous” was too harsh a word for what I was trying to say. Your bottom line seemed very strange in the context of what we know about the Christian fiction market. Of *course* authors and booksellers give readers what they want, whether or not it’s good for them, and how can you expect a diverse appetite from such a narrow demographic?
It’s like setting up a pizza stand in Chicago to sell New York style thin-crust pizza, then expressing dismay that folks in the Windy City prefer deep-dish. You’re a shrewd businessman, you’ve done your market research, and you know what people in Chicago have been buying. Yet you sigh, “We could have some really great pizza in this town if it weren’t for all these people who keep eating the local swill.” You chose to come to Chicago and sell to them. Is it really their fault?
Anyhow, finding yourself in this situation, you have some choices. You can give up your dream of selling gourmet pizza. Or, you can compromise your conviction that thin crust is best and sell the deep-dish pizza your customers are demanding. Or, you can take your pizza to New York, where people will appreciate it, but the BIg Apple is a hard, dirty town, and it can suck the soul out of you if you’re not careful.
Another option, and this seems to be where you’re going in the post, is to stay put and keep cranking out thin-crust pizza until those gastronomically-deprived folks in Chicago finally realize what they’ve been missing and start buying the good stuff. They deserve better, and you want to keep pressing on until they see the light. That’s a noble attitude.
There’s a problem, though. This being Chicago, the Mafia controls the pizza trade. They know deep-dish, they’ve been happily making money selling deep-dish since Al Capone was a toddler, and they want this to continue. They’re less than welcoming toward anybody who comes into their town trying to peddle thin-crust pizza.
So, it’s frustrating. You know you have a quality product, you know people would buy it if they’d just give it a try, but they’re not stepping up, and the Mafia isn’t helping.
Okay, I think I’ve killed that metaphor. If your assessment is correct, and the only way to change the situation is to change the appetite of the market (that is, the readers, not the CBA), I’m interested to hear how you propose to do that.
It was a good post–the article you linked to was very interesting, and I apologize for not saying that up front before I launched into my little rant earlier. Feel free to quote me all you like, and I promise to comment respectfully on your blog when you do.
And don’t stop selling that thin-crust pizza.
Fred
Cat, I’ll look for your article tomorrow. Thanks for the heads up. Yes, to do justice to the topic, a comment seems too short. I actually took two blog posts because my Monday Spec Faith article reflected some of the thoughts Mike’s post generated.
Becky
Cliff, I’m glad you’re discovering more Christian fiction. I had an editor at a writers’ conference chide those of us in his class who were trying to publish with houses when we were ignorant of the books they put out. It made me start doing some homework. That was eight years ago ,and I’ve gone from not very impressed to finding some favorites. It’s good to see progress.
Becky
Fred, in your first post you said:
You went on in your second post to offer a very Fred-like vivid illustration.
But it is that very point that I’m disputing. I work in my church library and see what fiction people check out, and who those people are. I talk to some of them, ask what they thought of this book or that, ask why they like a certain type of book. None of them says they like the books because the endings are predictable and the characters plastic. I think they are willing to put up with those things in the books that have those elements — and my other point was, not all Christian fiction does.
I happen to have read the fantasy book the writer of the original article referred to, and I actually agree with her assessment of it. It was the debut novel by a theologian. A theologian! And we wonder why it was “pushing an agenda”? (I actually criticized it for its theological waywardness, though. After all, I figured the man should know better if he was going to write in such overt terms).
Here are some of comments in the “Weakness” section of my review:
Why do I mention this? Because the CSFF Blog Tour has featured books that are quite different. To every book on the tour that has received tepid response, there are ten that have received substantial praise. In no way is the book this student analyzed a measure of Christian fantasy. It just isn’t.
Becky
Hey, Mike, thanks for stopping by. I didn’t mean to steal your commenters.
Before you responded to Fred, I was actually going to suggest that you were not the one disrespecting the readers, but you were echoing thoughts from publishers. Perhaps you agree with them, but how can that be? Readers do find your book, and those by T. L. Hines, Tosca Lee, Sibella Giorella, Katie Cushman, Mike Dellosso, Brandilyn Collins, and a good number of others.
It seems to me, if readers really liked predictable endings and plastic characters, all these writers who write good stories with believable characters would not keep getting contracts.
Becky
Fred, I appreciate your response. No bad blood. And I love the analogy (especially when the Mafia show up). A quick response. The CBA purports to represent “pizza lovers,” not just “Chicago style pizza lovers.” Unless they ARE saying that THEY ONLY MAKE ONE TYPE OF PIZZA, which would reinforce the stereotypes. And force me, a pizza lover, to move to New York.
[...] posted on this topic, and I found I couldn’t comment succinctly. Therefore, a response post. (Becky Miller has done likewise, from a different [...]
Becky–You stole no one. I’d read Mike’s post earlier on his site, didn’t have time to comment then, and by the time I returned, the commenters had already covered my points. Then I saw the reference in your post, thought I’d offer a brief take, and got caught up in the moment, or something. : /
I agree it’s easy to broad-brush any of the players in the “what’s wrong with Christian fiction” conversation. We can blame the writers, but everybody agrees they’re getting better, and some are outstanding. We’d can blame the CBA, but they’re responding to market forces and offering what sells. It’s a business, and there *have* been some signs of progress on that front, however slow. We’re left with the readers, who *must* have inferior taste if they keep buying inferior books, which gives the CBA no incentive to change anytime soon, and perpetuates the writing of more inferior books. As you observed, however, Christian readers aren’t a monolithic community–many of them have broad tastes in literature and prefer more challenging stories. They’ll gravitate toward the better ones eventually.
So, where does that leave us? I don’t know. I haven’t yet seen a satisfying answer to this problem. Change takes time. Perhaps we’re too impatient. I think it would be interesting to see a study of what Christian fiction readers are reading when they aren’t reading Christian fiction (try saying that three times fast).
Mike–To preserve my admittedly tortured analogy, I think the CBA would proport to represent all the pizza lovers in *Chicago.* I don’t think they’d be invincibly committed to one type of pizza, but being prudent mobsters, they’d restrict the activities of entrepreneurs until they were certain they’d make more money by integrating the new ideas than by sticking with tradition.
Okay, I’m done with the pizza story.
“A theologian! And we wonder why it was “pushing an agenda”? (I actually criticized it for its theological waywardness, though. After all, I figured the man should know better if he was going to write in such overt terms).”
Becky, this is what I love about you.
Between here and SpecFaith, I can see I’m going to have trouble getting any work done today.
Lots of great food for thought!
Some HTML tags involved here, please feel free to edit if it turns out messy, Becky…
“In the internet age a greater percentage of Christians are coming in contact with Christian fiction, including Christian readers who have never read anything besides books from a safely secular publisher. In addition new self-publishing technology means that Christian authors can challenge the Christian publishing norms and still be (self-) published. Who knows where this will lead?”
Becky pointed me to this comment by Nissa, and I think it’s an interesting point.
In working with a variety of touchpoints around the Christian writing world–large-house, independent companies, and self-pubbers–I have to say I think it leads to the same thing in this corner as elsewhere.
Which is that there’s more content going out, but unless a strong background of industry expertise is involved, success in audience connection is very unlikely.
I see that difference between indie presses started by former industry employees, and those started as grassroots author movements. Also between those self-pubbers who’ve studied and worked on strong platform, and those who have yet to learn how. Every bit of business knowledge counts, and traditional publishing is foundational to developing that knowledge. The base of accumulated expertise there cannot be underestimated, and deserves great respect for what it’s contributing to successful new developments, whether that knowledge arrives by direct or indirect dissemination into the continuum of publishing approaches.
It’s something that I struggle to keep up with, to be honest. There is so much evolving in terms of new tools, and how the tools themselves keep evolving. And there’s so much evolving in how publishers are doing business to survive those changes.
All I know is that standout content remains at the core, because word-of-mouth is the unchanging force, regardless of new media for transmitting it. The publishing route is a series of individual decisions about how each writer can best access that transmission power and best connect with their audience.
[...] some great discussion. And not a few dissenters. In one of the posts spawned from that piece, this by Becky Miller, one of the commenters, Fred Warren, said something that I’ve heard a lot since I’ve [...]