Things changed for me when I read The Man Who Was Thursday. G.K. Chesterton’s novel has been called a “metaphysical thriller,” but its brisk pace, lively dialogue and wry humor are rich with philosophical density. According to Wikipedia, the author
suffered from depression for much of his life, and claimed afterwards that he wrote this book as an unusual affirmation that goodness and right were at the heart of every aspect of the world. He had hoped the book would serve as an encouragement to himself and to other members of his family who also had the tendency to become melancholy.
As one who’s given to bouts of melancholy, I can attest to a strange buoyancy I derive from Chesterton’s work. At the time of that reading, not only did The Man Who Was Thursday yank me out of an emotional rut, it 
inspired me to keep writing.
So it was interesting to learn how Chesterton, and two other influential Christian authors, had a similar effect on a prominent speculative writer.
Neil Gaiman is arguably one of the most recognized, prolific, influential writers of speculative fiction alive today. Gaiman has written for film and theater, collaborated on children’s books and graphic novels, and has become something of a cult superstar. But what surprises me most about him, is the “religious” influences in his early life.
I learned of it first while scanning Chesterton’s bio at The American Chesterton Society, where Gaiman is listed, among many others, who have praised Chesterton’s writings. More from another Chesterton’s bio:
The author Neil Gaiman has stated that The Napoleon of Notting Hill was an important influence on his own book Neverwhere. Gaiman also based the character Gilbert, from the comic book The Sandman, on Chesterton. Gaiman’s novel Good Omens, co-authored with Terry Pratchett is dedicated “to the memory of G.K. Chesterton: A man who knew what was going on.”
Apparently, G.K. Chesterton wasn’t the early Christian influence upon Neil Gaiman. In THIS TRANSCRIPT courtesy of the Mythopeic Society from a speech given by Gaiman at Mythcon 35, Gaiman said
Chesterton and Tolkien and Lewis were… not the only writers I read between the ages of six and thirteen, but they were the authors I read over and over again; each of them played a part in building me. Without them, I cannot imagine that I would have become a writer, and certainly not a writer of fantastic fiction.
Chesterton, J.R.R. Tolkien, and C.S. Lewis share several things in common, most notably they are all Christians. Is it just coincidence that one of today’s preeminent speculative authors was inspired by three decidedly “Christian” novelists?
Granted, Gaiman has downplayed some of those “religious” influences, stating that, as a child, “the religious allegory” of Narnia “went entirely over my head.” In fact, when he did “get it,” Gaiman “was personally offended.”
I felt that an author, whom I had trusted, had had a hidden agenda. I had nothing against religion, or religion in fiction — I had bought (in the school bookshop) and loved The Screwtape Letters, and was already dedicated to G.K. Chesterton. My upset was, I think, that it made less of Narnia for me, it made it less interesting a thing, less interesting a place.
Apparently, the enduring influence of Chesterton, Tolkien and Lewis upon Gaiman is not one of “faith” — at least in terms of how they would frame it.
Although Gaiman is Jewish, he attended several Church of England schools. There he studied, among other things, religion. The training gave him a wide background in both Jewish and Christian theology/apocrypha, which he seems to incorporate into many of his works. A recent piece in the New Yorker entitled Kid Goth, reveals other religious influences:
The pivotal fact of Gaiman’s childhood is one that appears nowhere in his fiction and is periodically removed from his Wikipedia page by the site’s editors. When he was five, his family moved to East Grinstead, the center of English Scientology, where his parents began taking Dianetics classes.
According to the piece, Gaiman’s father, who died last year, eventually began working in Scientology’s public-relations wing, rising in prominence. Gaiman’s two younger sisters are both still active in Scientology.
So where have these myriad religious influences left the author?
These days, Gaiman tends to avoid questions about his faith, but says he is not a Scientologist. Like Judaism, Scientology is the religion of his family, and he feels some solidarity with them. “I will stand with groups when I feel like they’re being properly persecuted,” he told me.
Having been brought up in two traditions, Gaiman is flexible in his devotions. “I’m terribly good at believing things, but I’m really good at believing things when I need them,” he said. “Which in my case tends to be if I’m writing about them.”
I’m not sure what Gaiman’s hero G.K. Chesterton would say about such religious flexibility. Either way, the lasting influence of Chesterton, Tolkien, and Lewis does not appear to have been “religious.” Instead, Gaiman attributes this:
“Without them, I cannot imagine that I would have become a writer, and certainly not a writer of fantastic fiction.”
So to answer the question — How did these early Christian influences shape Gaiman’s thinking? — we might answer, Very little. Is the inspiration to write, or more specifically, write “fantastic fiction” particularly a “Christian” effect? And as a Christian author, would you be satisfied having just stirred someone to write? Or is your mission un-accomplished apart from your reader’s conversion?
It is heartening, I guess, that Gaiman has come across these splendid Christian authors and apologists. But if, as Gaiman suggests, Chesterton was “A man who knew what was going on,” I wonder where that places Neil Gaiman.
Considering the effects I have on readers of mine (I don’t have any) is way too far down the road for me to entertain. I’m too concerned with actually finishing my first book to start worrying about my sphere of influence.
I’ve had people commend me face to face on some things they’ve read of mine, but honestly I can’t tell if they’re just blowing smoke to be nice.
Gaiman is a wonderful writer, though.
Thank you, Mike, for pointing the question of how we are influenced and how we influence. There isn’t a person out there who doesn’t have an opinion, and opinions are shaped by thought processes which are influenced by the environment we matured in as well as what we allow our eyes to see and our minds to absorb.
And as a Christian author, would you be satisfied having just stirred someone to write?
Hmm. No.
Or is your mission un-accomplished apart from your reader’s conversion?
Since man cannot save a single soul, this is not a viable question, but I get the gist of what you’re asking here. I’m not satisfied if my readers don’t get an accurate snapshot of Christianity in the process of the story. I also make sure they get an accurate picture of the world. But, yeah, my mission is to present both . . . for evaluation or consideration as implemental (and organic) parts of the story.
I understand what Gaiman said as far as Aslan’s significance going over his head. I had no real understanding of Jesus when I was growing up, but I believed in God. I wouldn’t have gotten the symbolism. (I’m not a fantasy reader obviously.) However, it shouldn’t have lessened the story for him. What author doesn’t have an agenda when he writes–either known or unknown to him? Should those who read Gaiman’s work suddenly be offended when they find out his “religious” thoughts or innate symbolisms when they’re discovered? Or should they just admit to enjoying the story and his writing?
Gaiman has been pretty much my most favorite writer for years. American Gods is perhaps his greatest novel, and one of the greatest ever written. In it Jesus is mentioned fleetingly, a drifter walking down the road, lost as the rest of us, and that’s that. I have a feeling that sums Gaiman’s feelings about Christianity up succintly. He wrote a short story once in which he does his best to desecrate the image of Lewis’ Narnia as best he can, and make Susan the heroine, since he wrote that he was very angry with how Lewis treated her at the end of the series. It’s the only piece by him I hate.
I definitely think the amount of influence we have on a person is subjective to their choice of how much they will allow, or how much they understand our “meaning”, and that’s just inevitable. We have to rely on the Spirit that he will speak to who He wishes with our words. For every Gaiman there’s thousands of other authors, philosophers, pastors, blog writers (like you) who were effected in a good way (though I would argue Gaiman’s influencing was not necessarily evil) by Chesterton, Tolkien, and Lewis. Praise God for that.
As long as Neil Gaiman is still alive, Jesus Christ can touch his heart — if it’s through a living voice or a voice long gone, it doesn’t matter. Eighty years and eternity are the same thing to Him; so there’s still time for Neil. Tolkien, Lewis and Chesterton will keep on speaking Truth as long as people read their words; those words came from Christ; and God has promised:
“so is my word that goes out from my mouth:
It will not return to me empty,
but will accomplish what I desire
and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.” Isaiah 55:11
And as a Christian author, would you be satisfied having just stirred someone to write?
Yes, absolutely…because I was stirred to write by other writers, ironically, none of them Christian. I can say – with complete honesty – that to date, only one Christian author’s work has encouraged me to KEEP writing. I was stirred long ago by other folks, however.
Or is your mission un-accomplished apart from your reader’s conversion?
I would hate to think someone became converted because of my work. That’s not my goal. Far better places to go for that. I am a Christian, so you’ll see those sensibilities in my work. But I want to tell a story, not a sermon. I don’t feel there’s anything wrong with that for those who feel called to do that. It’s just not for me.
I love Gaiman, also. American Gods, Anansi Boys, and Neverwhere are my favorites.
It was a pleasant surprise to read of the effects G.K. Chesterton has had on you. It seems like everyone I meet who has read his work says the same thing. His witty and charming writing is a joy to read, and his insights are profound. He has certainly been a good influence in my own writing, and I aspire to be like him as a writer. For those who follow your blog who have never read him, here’s a link to an online version of The Man Who Was Thursday. It’s well worth the read. http://www.bartleby.com/158/
Neil Gaiman is underwriting Scientology. The Scientologists list Neil Gaiman in the Cornerstone Newsletter along with Mary Gaiman, as contributing $35,000.00 in 2009. Being listed in the Cornerstone Newsletter means you are in good-standing with the cult.
In 2010, Mary Gaiman was awarded the “Gold Humanitarian Award” for her contribution of $500,000.00 to Scientology. This is significant because Mary Gaiman continues to be Neil Gaiman’s business partner in The Blank Corporation, which is now Neil Gaiman’s Scientology front and how he pays the cult.
Gaiman is also the “Vitamin Heir” of Scientology. The Gaiman family owns G&G Vitamins which reaps 6 million a year from selling The Purification Rundown Vitamins.
Gaiman’s two sisters, Claire Edwards and Lizzie Calciole are not just high-ranking Scientologists, they are the head of RECRUITING and the head of Wealden House, the Scientology stronghold in East Grinstead. These two cannot associate with Neil unless he is in good standing.
Here we come to that ACK part of the conversation. Do we stand firm against what we know is false teaching and a sure way to Hell, and use that to keep us from reading an author? I never bought another Ron L. Hubbard book after I learned what he was teaching. I actually worked for those guys in a front in Baton Rouge. They tried to get me to jump through all kinds of hoops… I needed the job, but not that badly. When this gal tried to convince me that we were all gods I got up from the table and walked out never looking back.
I strongly believe that how ever an author has been raised, whatever his/her experiences, and what is believed in the heart bleeds into what they write. Sometimes it is so very subtle and other times it’s quite blatant and always it is with the reasoning that it is the character, not the author, and that it is for realism.
Does it matter that purchasing a book (or even reviewing a book) puts pennies in pockets that contribute to the spreading of false doctrine? His munificense to Scientology does give me pause. Throw tomatoes if you like, but I don’t even like going to casinos even though there are a plethora of them close to where I live. So I guess you know where I stand on that…
“How did these early Christian influences shape Gaiman’s thinking? — we might answer, Very little.” So far. Gaiman’s not dead and we have no real idea HOW they shaped his thinking…as he’s not done thinking yet.
“Is the inspiration to write, or more specifically, write ‘fantastic fiction’ particularly a ‘Christian’ effect?” Obviously no.
“And as a Christian author, would you be satisfied having just stirred someone to write?” Not yet — but Gaiman can still come to Christ and Lewis, Tolkien and Chesterton might STILL influence that change.
“Or is your mission un-accomplished apart from your reader’s conversion?” I would say “not accomplished yet”. There’s still time.
“It is heartening, I guess, that Gaiman has come across these splendid Christian authors and apologists. But if, as Gaiman suggests, Chesterton was ‘A man who knew what was going on,’ I wonder where that places Neil Gaiman.” I guess I’ve always thought you were clear on this — at least in the tenor and tone of you previous writing: We continue to pray the Holy Spirit move in 49-year-old Gaiman’s heart as he did in Lewis’ when Narnia’s creator was 34. God’s time is His time and anything can happen as long as Neil Gaiman still lives, breathes and thinks. People have walked away from Scientiology before and while Gaiman’s despite the fact that his Scientological brothers and sisters talk to him…church defiance in the face of filial love wouldn’t be a first…
I would be very happy if my writing inspired other people to write and I don’t aim to convert people with my writing.
There is nothing wrong with people attempting to present the gospel through fiction. But there is nothing wrong with people trying to get readers to think more deeply about sin or sorrow or beauty or science through fiction, either. Mindless entertainment is pointless and a waste of everyone’s time. But to stir someone to think deeply is not a waste of time, even if the gospel is never preached. If people can think more clearly about an issue, if they can feel deeply, if they are stirred by beauty or moved by a snapshot of poverty or depravity…these things are worthwhile. All of this can be used by God to soften the heart or to stir up longings for God.
In the end, whether we preach the gospel in our fiction, or just aim to move someone to feel and think about life or eternity or the human condition, we can’t change people. Only God can do that. So our goal should not be to convert people but to convey truth. What is done with the truth we present in our fiction is between the reader and God.
Neil Gaiman’s one character trait that is consistent is to lie. Gaiman has nothing to do with Christianity other than to mock it with his sick lifestyle. Gaiman trumpets the fact he is in an “open marriage” with Amanda Palmer. Gaiman is a lecherous user with no moral compass who has bizarrely decided to write children’s books. The money he has shoveled into the coffers of Scientology, half a million in 2010 have bought him a tireless team of publicists who release spin 24 hours a day. Gaiman is a cynical, miserable human being who is sizing up your daughters to take up to his hotel room and use sexually with his bisexual wife cheering him on. Gaiman is a debauched, puerile creep.