The Twilight Phenomenon

Here it is, Fantasy Friday already. Some of you may feel “fantasied out” since I’ve been discussing John Olson’s fantasy, Shade all week. But remarkable, this is also the week of a movie release with the same kind of cultural impact as Harry Potter. Or nearly so.

I’ve heard some in the media refer to Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight as the next Harry Potter. And last night one news program featured a story about the line of movie goers waiting for the midnight showing of the film version of the YA novel.

Why did I say this was “remarkable”? Because Twilight is a vampire story and Shade is a vampire story (no matter what Olson says about it being a vampireless vampire story. A Mulo is, for all intents and purposes, a vampire, and there’s no getting around it). When we planned the Shade CSFF blog tour, we had no information about the Twilight movie release, so there was no intentional connection on our part.

The thing is, what little I know about Twilight, I surmise the vampire may actually be vampires, ranging from good to evil. This idea introduces many questions, some of which one of our tour participants, Nissa, dealt with here and here.

I found this line in particular interesting:

In particular, can a vampire be saved, or are they doomed to hell? I know, worrying about the eternal salvation of imaginary beings is a little silly, but still….

Imaginary beings. Like wizards who can wave wands to make things happen or ride broomsticks?

If J.K. Rowling can fancify witches and wizards, how much more can Meyer do so with creatures that never have existed?

I remember when Bryan Davis’s first book Raising Dragons came out, one critic wrote a scathing review, saying he shouldn’t have changed the “real King Arthur story.” As if there was a “real” story. An established myth, yes, but a real story?

So too with vampires, it would seem.

Honestly, I never imagined myself taking this position. Vampires, after all, live off the blood of others. That is wrong on so many levels. But what has Meyer done with this fantasized creature? Once again the caution seems necessary—no knee-jerk reactions. Take a look at what the story is actually about and, with discernment, measure it against Scripture.

If only I wasn’t so repulsed by the whole vampire idea … 😮

More about Christian Horror (?)

Before I get started, I want to mention I’ll be putting up the poll for the November CSFF Top Blogger Award soon. You might take some time to read the blog posts from the participants listed in the last post with three checks in front of their names. Those are the bloggers who are eligible for the award.

On Monday I concluded a discussion about the definition of horror with this paragraph:

So where does Shade fit in? Does Dr. Olson’s story about supernatural evil—for clearly, it is that, even though there are no vampires—exist to generate fear, or to wrestle with the forces of evil? Is it a story intended for nothing more than entertainment, or is it attempting a greater goal by entering into the examination of spiritual warfare?

My initial reaction to Shade was that it reminded me of a Frank Peretti book—not a particular one, but that kind of story that brings the supernatural to life in a contemporary setting. I have happily called such books “supernatural suspense,” because they are most definitely not slasher-variety horror. There is a greater purpose than to frighten.

Perhaps adding “Christian” mitigates the denotation of “horror,” and therefore “Christian Horror” is an accurate name for the types of novels (and short stories) that do something greater. I happen to think it is important that people come to grips with the spiritual world. The fact that demons exist, that Satan is real, that a battle is on-going seem to be important facts to grasp if a Christian is to take seriously the Apostle Paul’s admonition to put on spiritual armor.

I’m not so sure about fist fights and knife fights with demon-possessed characters, however. It seems to me that such plot developments may exist primarily to entertain. Not a bad thing, mind you. Stories need to be interesting, after all. But if a book is to reveal something about spiritual warfare in the here and now real world, perhaps the actual tools of fighting evil need to come to the forefront.

Otherwise, how is a reader to think? Evil does exist, but Melchi, who protected Hailey, is just a character in a book. Who is to protect readers, then? Does Shade give any insights into answers of that question?

I don’t think so. Hailey is a Christian, after all, but she does the least fighting of all. In fact, her most proactive role is to run away.

Yes, there are many unanswered questions in Shade, many of which may be addressed in future books. And there are the many subliminal references (I ran across another one today. The Blaise character I wasn’t sure to whom he referred? My guess is it’s Blaise Pascal, the noted 17th century mathematician and Christian apologist who wrote criticizing a trend in the church to use reason to justify certain sins). Yet the actual story seems to be a pleasant yarn, a good vs. evil struggle, with good coming out on top, mostly by happy coincidence and a selfless, sacrificial act from an off camera character.

In the end, I guess the reader needs to decide if he or she thinks this work exists for its entertainment value alone, or if it accomplishes something greater. My guess is Dr. Olson was trying for something greater. Did he pull it off? Up to you to decide.

Shade – A Review

The CSFF blog tour November feature, Shade by John Olson (B&H Publishing; John is pictured on the left at the Mount Hermon Christian Writers Conference last year), fits into the adult Christian speculative fiction genre. Some have called it Christian horror, though I found it less than horrifying, on every level.

The Story. Hailey Maniates, a graduate student in San Francisco, experiences a frightening and inexplicable presence one night when she thinks she is working alone in her lab. She flees the building and finds herself in a nearby park where she is assaulted by a man with a knife. Before he can harm her, a giant of a man, apparently homeless, rescues her and carries her to a hospital because she has hurt her ankle and can’t walk.

In the hospital Hailey’s hysteric account of what happened makes the doctors suspect she has had a psychotic episode. They put her on a seventy-two hour observation and give her medication to treat her perceived paranoid schizophrenia.

Throughout the remainder of the story, Hailey vascillates between knowing she isn’t crazy to wondering if she and those helping her might be.

Eventually she finds the homeless man, or he finds her. Melchi believes he has the duty to protect others from the Mulo, a being he knows to hunt the Standing. Hailey is one of the Standing, according to Melchi, so he is determined to protect her.

OK, that gives you enough. You can probably see the tension that develops for Hailey. Is he delusional? Is Hailey? Are they both? Or is there a real enemy, and if so, who can they trust?

Strengths. Shade is well written. At times one or another character experiences a delusional state, and instead of describing it, Olson puts the reader into the swirling, uncertain mindset of the character, to the point that I felt off center at times. Here’s an example. Hailey is at dinner with a character called Sabazios. They’ve just been seated in the restaurant:

She looked back up to expectant, confident eyes and plunged mind and soul into their depths. Candlelight flickered bright and cold within twin black orbs. Delicate white fish in creamy sauce. Ruby-red wine swirled, lit from within by starbursts of shivering light. A blanket of fog flowed over them, shutting out the eyes of the moon. The flame burned brighter, radiating shimmering heat. The kiss of red rubies, cold and bright on quivering skin. Hailey leaned forward, yearning for the kiss, but a roaring wind held her back. She leaned into the storm, trembling and cold. Hair lashing in her face, she let its swirling tendrils hold her close in a numbing embrace.

The roar stopped. Sabazios was looking down at her through a crystal screen. She leaned into his arms, holding him tight, pressing her face into his lightly scented jacket. …

“Shall we go in?” Gripping, echoing inside her soul, his voice penetrated like a command.

Hailey looked around in a confused daze. They were standing at the front door of Tiffany’s apartment.

Hailey’s dazed, but so is the reader, at least a little—weren’t they about to have dinner? But the meal part of the date and the ride home is all there. It’s a masterful piece of writing, I think, because it gives a summation of the unimportant, yet makes it important by showing it in a way that lets the reader experience things the same way Hailey experienced them.

Another masterful thing Olson did was use the setting, particularly the fog, to good effect in creating the delusional feel.

I thought the plot was good. It wasn’t predictable, for the most part, and there were plenty of action and conflict.

Weaknesses. I felt like I knew these characters, but to be honest, I didn’t particularly care about them. There are a couple tragedies and one particular victory, and I didn’t feel strongly in any of those instances—not sorrow, not great joy or even relief.

One blogger mentioned that perhaps if readers could get to know Hailey pre-inciting incident—the normal, Hailey, in other words—that might have worked better. I agree. I actually kept myself at an emotional arm’s distance at first because I didn’t know if she was to be a victim of a crime who would disappear off the stage. (I’ve been fooled into caring for a character who dies after chapter one too many times! 😦 ) Perhaps, then, my not caring for the characters can be traced to that initial reaction.

The bigger issue for me was the conversion scene. For most of the novel, I didn’t realize the character who converted needed to convert. Then in a few pages, this person is confronted with need, agrees, and is saved. End of issue. In other words, it apparently plays no part in what happens next.

Though I thought the scene was handled poorly, I still thought I saw how it would serve the story, and therefore why it was necessary. But no, I was wrong. It didn’t serve the story. There was another solution that had nothing to do with the character being or not being a Christian. In the end, the conversion felt like an add on, an indiscreet nod to the fact that this is Christian fiction and needs a reason to be so categorized. For me, it didn’t work.

In fact, I thought the whole ending seemed rushed. I’ve since learned there is a follow-up book in the planning; therefore, many of the loose ends were purposefully so.

I’m OK with loose ends if I know they are meant to be that way. I’m not sure, though, about a book that is the beginning of a longer story masquerading as a stand-alone.

Recommendation. I’m glad I read this book. I would definitely have felt like I missed out had I not. Was it too frightening? Not at all. (But maybe that’s because I never connected closely to the characters). For those readers who like supernatural suspense, I recommend this book.

And the others on the tour? See for yourself what their recommendations are. And if you’d like to win a free copy of Shade, why not enter Jason Isbell‘s contest?

√ Brandon Barr
√√ Jennifer Bogart
Justin Boyer
√ Keanan Brand
√√√ Kathy Brasby
√√√ Valerie Comer
√ Karri Compton (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
CSFF Blog Tour
√ Stacey Dale
√ D. G. D. Davidson (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
√ Janey DeMeo
√ Jeff Draper
√ April Erwin
√ Karina Fabian
√ Todd Michael Greene
√ Katie Hart
√ Joleen Howell
√√√ Jason Isbell
√ Jason Joyner
√ Kait
√ Carol Keen (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
√ Magma
√ Margaret
√ Rachel Marks
√ Shannon McNear (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
√ Melissa Meeks
√√√ Mirtika
√ Pam Morrisson (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
√ Eve Nielsen
√ Nissa
√√√ John W. Otte
√√ Steve Rice
√√ Chawna Schroeder
√ James Somers
√ Robert Treskillard
√ Steve Trower
√ Speculative Faith
Jason Waguespac
√ Laura Williams
√ Timothy Wise

“√” indicates I know a blog post is up.

Shade – November CSFF Tour, Day 2

The CSFF Blog Tour feature, Shade (B&H Publishing), “isn’t your grandma’s prairie romance,” according to author John Olson in an interview over at Title Trakk earlier this year.

Dr. Olson goes on to say:

There’s more going on beneath the surface than even the most brilliant reader will be able to pick up on, and it could very well be frustrating to readers who are used to having their stories served to them in nice bite-sized chunks. I’m not just nervous about it’s release; I’m chew-my-fingernails-up-to-my-elbows terrified.

So what, I can’t help wondering, did I miss? I surmise that there are undercurrents swirling around the villain—called Mulo (vampire) yet taking the form of a man named Sabazios Vladu. The first name is the same as a Phrygian sky father god.

That would tie in with one of the other characters who goes by Athena, though her real name is Athalia, closely related to Athaliah, an exceedingly wicked queen of Judah (daughter of Ahab, she had all of her grandsons killed so she could take the throne—except one escaped, a boy named Joash).

Then we have Melchi, short for Melchizedek, a type of Christ because he was the prophet/priest/king Abraham encountered, which the writer of the book of Hebrews explained. Or what about Hailey Maniates? Her last name is the same as a group of Greeks known as fearless warriors. A number of historical and mythical stories are connected to them.

And that’s just the names of the main players. There are some occasional characters that have obvious import that has yet to be developed such as Blaise (a reference to Saint Blaise?) with the rainbow mohawk hair (rainbow hair? The John 3:16 guy who used to hold up signs at football games?)

There are also the intriguing epigraphs from Milton and Bram Stoker, the passages from Paradise Lost with Melchi’s notes, and the list of authors Sabazios revered.

Tip of the iceberg, I suspect, given what Dr. Olson said about the work. I can’t help but wonder if having so many subtle or obscure references adds to a work. Some, to be sure, made me wonder. Why, for instance, was the main character named after a figure who was a type of Christ? It was interesting that he seemed to have an Old Testament faith until near the end and that he was willing to make a sacrifice for someone he loved.

But do those things cause me to care about the character more? And isn’t that essential for a story to really grab a reader and stay with him?

OK, tomorrow my review. But what did everyone else think? Check out the posts by these CSFF participants:

Brandon Barr
√ Jennifer Bogart
Justin Boyer
√ Keanan Brand
√√ Kathy Brasby
√√ Valerie Comer
√ Karri Compton (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
CSFF Blog Tour
√ Stacey Dale
√ D. G. D. Davidson (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
√ Janey DeMeo
√ Jeff Draper
√ April Erwin
√ Karina Fabian
√ Todd Michael Greene
Katie Hart
Joleen Howell
Jason Isbell
Jason Joyner
Kait
√ Carol Keen (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
Magma
Margaret
Rachel Marks
√ Shannon McNear (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
Melissa Meeks
√ Pam Morrisson (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
√ Eve Nielsen
√ Nissa
√√ John W. Otte
√ Steve Rice
Mirtika
√√ Chawna Schroeder
√ James Somers
Robert Treskillard
√ Steve Trower
√ Speculative Faith
Jason Waguespac
√ Laura Williams
√ Timothy Wise

“√” indicates I know a blog post is up.

Shade – November’s CSFF Tour, Day 1

I can’t help but think this tour for John Olson’s Shade (B&H Publishing) will be one of the more interesting tours we’ve had in CSFF this year. As Jason Joyner, CSFF member in good standing (now on sabbatical to help tend to his newborn daughter 😀 ), mentioned in a blog post last August, this book has been touted as a vampireless vampire story.

I hear that designation and my first thought is “horror.” OK, that reaction takes place on several levels—horror, the genre, for one and Horror! a Christian horror story? on another.

The first level. Is Shade indeed a horror story? I’m maybe the worst person to answer this question since I’ve made a point not to read horror. In the past I objected to the idea that Horror as a genre, defined by Wikipedia as that which exists to generate fear, could, in fact, be Christian.

I have yet to find anyone quibble with that conclusion, but many people disagree with the definition. Since it isn’t mine, I have no vested interest in whether it is or is not right. The point for me is that Wikipedia thinks it’s right—Wikipedia, the encyclopedia of the people. In other words, as long as that definition stands on the Wikipedia site, I assume that most people visiting that page aren’t finding the definition inaccurate.

However, Olson begins several sections of Shade with quotes from Bram Stoker’s Dracula, quotes that make it clear there is much wrestling with the supernatural in that classic story. Including the quotes makes me think that Olson is tying his story to that same line.

Modern horror writer, and recently professing Catholic convert, Anne Rice said as much about her vampire novels in her statements concerning her journey to faith. Those earlier novels, she said (and now has written in her latest book Called Out of Darkness: A spiritual confession), were part of her exploration of the supernatural and played a big role in her returning to Catholicism. From a statement by Rice posted on her Web site:

I am hardly stating an original idea when I say that such stories are transformative. They invite the reader on a journey which reflects perfectly the formula of Aristotle for great drama: as one reads (or watches the film or play), one feels pity and fear, and eventually experiences catharsis. One is taken to a place, through the literary experience, to which one might not have ever gone on one’s own. I feel strongly that dark stories demand that the audience earn the transformation; they require a certain suffering on the part of the audience as the price of eventual affirmation.

I would like to submit that my vampire novels … are attempting to be transformative stories as well. All these novels involve a strong moral compass. Evil is never glorified in these books; on the contrary, the continuing battle against evil is the subject of the work. The search for the good is the subject of the work.

Then later she says:

For me, the entire body of my earlier work, reflects a movement towards Jesus Christ. In 2002, I consecrated my work to Jesus Christ. This did not involve a denunciation of works that reflected the journey. It was rather a statement that from then on I would write directly for Jesus Christ. I would write works about salvation, as opposed to alienation; I would write books about reconciliation in Christ, rather than books about the struggle for answers in a post World War II seemingly atheistic world.

So where does Shade fit in? Does Dr. Olson’s story about supernatural evil—for clearly, it is that, even though there are no vampires—exist to generate fear, or to wrestle with the forces of evil? Is it a story intended for nothing more than entertainment, or is it attempting a greater goal by entering into the examination of spiritual warfare?

I guess you’ll need to see what others on the CSFF tour think. 😉 (OK, I’ll probably have my say later on, too).

Brandon Barr
Jennifer Bogart
Justin Boyer
√ Keanan Brand
√ Kathy Brasby
Valerie Comer
√ Karri Compton(not on the original list posted at CSFF)
CSFF Blog Tour
√ Stacey Dale
√ Janey DeMeo
√ Jeff Draper
April Erwin
√ Karina Fabian
√ Todd Michael Greene
Katie Hart
Joleen Howell
Jason Isbell
Jason Joyner
Kait
Magma
Margaret
Rachel Marks
Melissa Meeks
√ Pam Morrisson (not on the original list posted at CSFF)
√ Eve Nielsen
Nissa
√ John W. Otte
√ Steve Rice
Mirtika or Mir’s Here
√ Chawna Schroeder
√ James Somers
Robert Treskillard
Steve Trower
Speculative Faith
Jason Waguespac
Laura Williams
√ Timothy Wise

“√” indicates I know a blog post is up.

The Atheist Box

In the section I read today of The Dawkins Delusion? by Alister and Joanna Cullicut McGrath ( InterVarsity Press), the authors referred to something like a no-God box atheists put themselves in. It resonated with me because of a discussion I had with an atheist over at Spec Faith some months ago. At one point during the discussion, it dawned on me how limited is an atheist who believes that all we can know as truth must be discovered by the scientific method.

Essentially, an atheist who rules out the metaphysical has narrowed the options of what he will explore. If there is only the natural, then there can be no supernatural explanations of the things we don’t understand.

I’m reading John Olson’s Shade right now in preparation for next week’s CSFF blog tour, and the protagonist (one of them) came up against this very position. There can be no supernatural explanations, so when someone experiences something inexplicable, the only conclusion can be, You imagined it, conjured it up out of your diseased mind. Which is what many atheists conclude about Christians. God does not exist, they say, so a Christian who “hears” His voice, is a fool, a liar, a simpleton, or mentally ill.

It’s not so far from the conclusion C.S. Lewis (popularized by Josh McDowell) came to about Jesus based on the claims He made about Himself (liar, lunatic, or Lord)—with one exception: C.S. Lewis added that Jesus could be who He said He was.

The atheist gives himself no such option because he’s already ruled God out.

I commented on Mike Duran’s blog this morning regarding something he wrote about evolution, and once again, it hit me how many more options Christians have than atheists. After all, if an omnipotent God does exist (and He does), then what are the limits? But by making the presupposition that there is no God, an atheist is then left to figure things out via Man’s limited observations and reasoning. No wonder science keeps discovering new things and theories keep changing and science textbooks have to be rewritten.

Spiritually? Not much has changed from the day God kicked Adam and Eve out of the garden. Oh, sure, lots of history has happened, including the fulfillment of the prophecy to Satan that Man would bruise him on the head and Satan would bruise Him on the heel. And of course God gave us His written word as well as His Son. But we don’t need to continually discover new revelation in order to make sense of our world.

And we don’t need to fear new discoveries. They will always make sense because we have a God who can do the impossible. When something looks incongruous with Scripture, we can rest in the knowledge that it is not. Our understanding may be incomplete or veiled or our interpretation may be in error—we have lots of possibilities. The atheist in his box? Not so many. His data can’t be wrong—at least until another scientist comes along and proves that it is.

The earth is flat, after all. We can all see that it is flat. Sadly, the most adamant fundamentalist extremists just might be atheists who box themselves into a field of knowledge they know will most probably be altered one day.

A Promise to Remember

This is sort of a transition post. We’ve had wonderful discussions about theme and Christian fiction, stemming from a comment Andrew Peterson made in answer to a question that came up in another blog.

Ironically, I was reading in Jerry Jenkins‘ Writing for the Soul (Writers Digest, 2006), given out to all conferees by Mount Hermon at the Christian Writers Conference. In the forward, Francine Rivers wrote “We know it is one thing to be a Christian who writes, and quite another to be a Christian writer.”

I thought, Uh, we do? And what are the differing characteristics of the two? No disrespect to Ms. Rivers, who I know little about, but I tend to believe it is a good thing, a very good thing to wrestle with what it means to be a Christian (who we are) who writes (what we do) and/or a Christian writer (a writer informed by the change Christ has made in my life)—in short, this whole “what is Christian fiction” discussion we’ve been having.

But I’m getting sidetracked. What I really want to talk about is a book that illustrates what good Christian fiction is. I’m referring to Katie Cushman‘s debut novel, A Promise to Remember. Christy Award winning author John Olson, remember, touted this book as “flat out brilliant.”

I have to be honest. I purposefully slide this one down on my to-be-read pile after reading Sharon Souza’s Every Good and Perfect Gift (a book I reviewed here.) Understand, my delay had to do completely with my wanting to be in the right frame of mind. Knowing the premise of A Promise to Remember, I expected to be crying a lot.

The back of the book gives hints: “Two wounded women,” “the accident that changes everything,” and from James Scott Bell, “A beautifully written and heartfelt novel about loss …” Well, there’s more. But I knew what caused the wound, what was the loss. As you may remember, Katie was the driver of our little carpool up to Mount Hermon from Santa Barbara these last two years. And of course we talked about our writing. So I knew.

What I was ignoring was the rest of Jim Bell’s quote: “… about loss, love and forgiveness.”

Long story short, I got home from Mount Hermon and started in on Promise. By Monday, I knew I wouldn’t do anything else until I finished the book. It was gripping, real, tragic, triumphant, hopeful, engaging.

The story begins after loss has already occurred, and this had an odd effect on me. I didn’t feel the grief I was reading about. The book wasn’t really about that. It was about the repercussions of the grief, and those I entered into with my heart as well as with my head. But it was such a tangle. There was conflict, conflict, conflict, but who was the antagonist? Lots of people to root for, but if one came out ahead, it seemed the others would lose.

Wonderful tension. Great characters. Engaging from page one. Never coming across as succumbing to the victim syndrome, though certainly that would have fit the circumstances. But these characters really were larger than life, even as they felt so shrunken by their grief.

Powerful story. Now I want to talk to Katie about her theme. I did ask which she starts with when she writes a novel (her second is in the editing process, I believe), and surprisingly she said, Plot. (Score one for Jim Bell in his debate with Nick Harrison—and I’ll tell you about that next week when I get back to the Mount Hermon Report).

Recommendation? Must read. A Promise to Remember is one of those books that can touch a reader no matter what your preferred genre. Yes, the main characters are women, but men play a prominent role. It’s not a shoot-em-up story, but it is ripe with real life drama. Men will “get” this book, too. And readers who don’t pick it up will miss out.