≡ Menu

Christian Fiction and “The New Edgy”

So a while back, I joined a group for lovers of “edgy Christian fiction.” But I was disappointed. You see, unless you were a nun, a schoolmarm, or Mrs. Grundythe group really wasn’t very edgy.

That’s when it hit me: The term “edgy” means different things for different people.

Take last month’s “conversation” regarding author Eric Wilson’s challenge to readers and writers of Christian fiction. My post at Novel Journey garnered not a few comments, one of which was from literary agent Chip MacGregor. For the record, I enjoy Chip’s blog and appreciate his candor. Nevertheless, I was underwhelmed by his comments regarding that post and replied:

“…as one who reads both CBA and general market books, I just haven’t found these ‘edgy’ CBA books people keep talking about. (And if someone cites Francine Rivers again in this regard, I’m gonna kick my dog.) You say, ‘The fact is, the market calls for both edgy AND safe books. CBA provides both.’ I dunno. These books might be ‘edgy’ in relation to CBA standards, but as someone who works in the construction field and reads pretty widely, they really aren’t. “

Chip responded:

“Francine – edgy? Ha! I love Francine, but she’s not what I’d consider edgy. A selection: Read Lisa Samson, Charles Martin, Gina Holmes, Claudia Mair Burney, Stephen James, Mary DeMuth, Mark Bertrand’s “Back on Murder.” That should get you started.”

Uh, well… I have read some of those authors, and know others who’ve read the rest. The consensus? NOT EDGY.  Don’t misunderstand me. This is not meant to suggest that those novelists aren’t excellent writers. They are! But if those authors are representative of the best in “edgy” Christian fiction, then my contention stands. When Christians talk about “edgy” fiction, they mean two different things.

Which is why my “edgy” is your “obscene.”

To be “edgy,” there must be an “edge,” a “boundary,” a “demarcation.” In that sense, the term “edgy Christian fiction” reaffirms our “boundaries.” But in order to really be “edgy,” a Christian novel must push — even cross — those boundaries. Problem is, they don’t.

The Christian books that deal with “edgy” topics — rape, incest, adultery, addiction, lust, etc. — do so behind a scrim of safety. In other words, you can write a book about rape. You just can’t be explicit. You can write a book about a foul-mouthed racist. You just can’t actually show him being a foul-mouthed racist. You can write a book about a conflicted porn star. Just spare us the specifics.

We are taught as writers to SHOW not TELL. But if you’re a Christian author, that doesn’t always apply. You see, SHOWING certain things can get you into trouble. We don’t need to know what specific female body part your antagonist is staring at. We don’t need to hear the epithets being hurled at the black boy. We don’t need to see the drunken father actually touching his daughter in the tool shed. Apparently, TELLING has its advantages. In this way, “Edgy” Christian fiction has come to mean writing ABOUT difficult subjects, without actually going into detail.

That’s the “new edgy.”

Hey, everyone has to draw a line somewhere. Some people just draw the line at different places. The Christian publishing industry happens to draw the line more conservatively than my tastes. Heck, a lot of people do.

But as someone who spent 11 years in the ministry, I think our PG worldview is flat outta touch.  For instance, once I counseled a man who had committed bestiality. How does one approach a situation like that? Or do we just never talk about it? Another man was addicted to masturbation, to the point where he bloodied himself. Then there was a woman who performed weird sexual rituals for her husband. She was a new Christian and he threatened to shoot her if she stopped. Along the way, there were drug addicts, self-mutilators, incest victims, and serial adulterers. And the list goes on. The funny thing is, the average church-goer had no idea.  And would rather keep it that way.

Which is probably why the “new edgy” just seems so… tame.

To my wife, a steak with any trace of pink in it is “raw.” To me, the bloodier the better. Likewise, to some readers of Christian fiction, any trace of language or sex is “edgy.” But to me, if it’s not “raw,” it’s over-cooked.

* * *

So do you think some Christian fiction is genuinely “edgy”? Do you agree that the term is relative? Do you think Christian fiction can get any “edgier” and still remain “Christian”? And do you think it’s possible to remain true to a story without sometimes showing explicit elements?

{ 94 comments… add one }
  • Keven Newsome August 29, 2010, 6:29 PM

    I think the problem is a little more fundamental. We’ve messed up by separating out the Christian market from everyone else. It’s the Christian booksellers and publishers who can’t tolerate true edginess.

    There are edgy Christian books out there. They’re being published be ABA publishers. They’re in the world, not of it… as we should be. Meanwhile, CBA is in their own world of denial.

  • Kaci August 29, 2010, 6:36 PM

    Good post.

    “Edgy” is yet another term I just don’t find useful. To me it screams “Let’s hype this up as much as possible.” If everything is mind-boggling/blowing, nail-biting, gripping, thrilling, mesmerizing, and ‘edge-of-your-seat,’ then let’s take a lesson from The Incredibles: If everyone is a Super, the Supers cease to exist, because the Supers are now normal.

    Likewise, to call everything including the kitchen sink “edgy” not only sounds like “totally rad!” (meaning, really kinda dorky) is for “edgy” to become…normal.

    I have a mental “five scale” system. Most books are, in my head, between two-star and four-star. I can count on one hand the number I’ve given mental ones or fives. Movies…most barely make 3, as far as I’m concerned.

    Just saying.

    And just to make sure I answered the questions:

    So do you think some Christian fiction is genuinely “edgy”? Do you agree that the term is relative?

    I think “edgy” is a useless, overused term, so, yes, it’s a bit relative. As for how much genuine edginess is out there, I have no idea.

    Do you think Christian fiction can get any “edgier” and still remain “Christian”?

    I honestly think there’s a line that shouldn’t be crossed, Christian or no. There’s a line between taking something dark and making something glorious, and simply…being grotesque. If it falls into the grotesque, it’s too far. Christian or non-Christian, there are things you just don’t do.

    And do you think it’s possible to remain true to a story without sometimes showing explicit elements?

    A resounding and solid: It depends.

  • Jason August 29, 2010, 7:39 PM

    Thank you for this post. I’m a neophyte and my first book was a serial killer crime novel. I’d been criticized that my serial killer wasn’t “evil” enough and that I needed to tone down the gleeful manner in which he disposed of the victims. (It was a revenge motive so he was both enjoying the taste of “justice” while at the same struggling with what he was doing.) It’s good to know that some people out there want a story from a Christian worldview that’s realistic to the world.

  • Dan T. Davis August 29, 2010, 7:51 PM

    Very interesting. I am on the edge in many ways, but have backed away from the edge as well as being a “Christian” writer in my three children’s books. If you read them carefully, you’d understand that the girl in the second book was sexually abused before she went to live with Santa. The Indian girl in the third book was racially profiled and teased/beaten much more than her future husband would ever admit. Thankfully, Santa was a ‘saint’, even if his elves were not. The point? Edginess can be there – even if veiled or hidden. That said – my next books (NOT children’s books) may drop over your cliff – and unfortunately may not be as marketable. That’s the real edge – if you can’t sell it, you’re just (to be edgy) – pissing into the wind. Whew!

  • Brenda Jackson August 29, 2010, 8:03 PM

    I’m just not sure why an explicit scene of rape, to use that particular example, is essential to reaching someone. Are we saying that an unbeliever can’t get the horror of rape unless described in explicit detail? I believe any person, believer or non, ought to be given more credit than that.

    So how is that helpful, and an improvement to CBA fiction?

    • Mike Duran August 29, 2010, 8:49 PM

      Brenda, I am definitely not suggesting that every gory detail should be shown in every situation. Not only is it unnecessary to many stories, at some point it probably becomes gratuitous. So PG is a necessary category.

      But I would flip the question on you. Are you saying that the explicit horrors of rape should NEVER be shown? Are you saying showing an explicit scene CANNOT be used to “reach” someone? The fact is, showing the explicit horrors of rape may, in some cases, be necessary to the story and may also be essential to reaching someone. Appreciate your comments!

  • Bruce Judisch August 30, 2010, 4:19 AM

    I tend to agree with Kaci. The reason I opt for Christian fiction is to get away from the language I hear everyday at work, the gore available every night on CSI reruns, and the hopelessness I see every day in the news. Why put out good money for discretionary reading only to have my ‘sense sand sensibilities’ bashed with all the above stuff I get for free?

    I do step out of Christian literature, but I realize I’m taking a chance doing so. I find excellent writing, but depressing ‘real’ themes (e.g., “The Swan Thieves”). I put the book down a no better person than I was picking it up. I like a book to threaten more change in my life than just having read another book. The question posed is, what does it take to do that?

    My novels do not shy away from the harshness of the times about which I write. They carry ‘mature’ themes and, I hope, realistic settings. But I credit my readers with enough intelligence to know that my character has vomited without describing the size and color of the chunks. I think I can apply the absolute “never” in that last sentence (ref your response to Brenda). I can apply the same absolute, for my own reading taste, to explicitness in rape, incest and some of the other atrocities you mention. I know what they are; I get it. I don’t have to break my leg to know that it hurts; I don’t have to read an explicit account of a rape to know that it’s horrible. Encountering explicit details of scenes like these doesn’t make me walk away from the book feeling like I’m better for it, like I understand the author’s story and theme better. It just makes me walk away from the book.

    I appreciate the author’s skill and finesse who can walk me to the “edge” without slapping me in the face along the way.

    • Mike Duran August 30, 2010, 4:48 AM

      Thanks for visiting, Bruce! I think your comment demonstrates my point: Readers / writers just have two set of standards when it comes to “edgy.” Yours and mine are different.

      I totally DO NOT write to “get away” from the “language,” “gore” and “hopelessness” in the world. This is not my motivation, nor do I think it’s a good one for Christian writers to have. Not saying we should be excessive in it, but if my purpose for being an author is to sanitize stuff, avoid stuff, tone down stuff, tiptoe around stuff, and make sure things turn out okay, I’m sorry, I think we’re missing the mark.

      I work in construction. I hear the foul language every day. My job is not to get those guys to stop cussing. My job is not to wag my finger at them when they cuss. My job is to love them where they’re at. When the guys in my shop learned I had to remove the language from my book, they laughed. “You can’t even say “hell” or “damn”?” Nope. In my opinion, I think an occasional “hell” or “damn” would bring realism to the story. I think my co-workers would agree.

      Which is why I have this quote in my sidebar — “The role of the artist is to not look away” (Akira Kurosawa). Sadly, I think much of Christian fiction is about “looking away.”

      Once again, thanks for commenting, Bruce!

      • Gus August 6, 2014, 2:25 PM

        “The role of the artist is to not look away”. I think the quote should be changed to “the role of a mature human being is to not look away.”
        I understand that there is a need for “fluff fiction” – what used to be called a “beach read”. And I have read, and sometimes stopped reading, what I consider gratuitous gore and filth because it was just that – gratuitous – not advancing the understanding of the story or the characters. But, we have turned into a nation of fluff readers – in fiction and non-fiction. Too many – christian & non-christian. Unfortunately, too many christians, like their secular counterparts, do this because they feel powerless. So they must “look away” because to do otherwise would require effort and action and possibly very serious repercussions to their already fearful lives.

  • Mark H. August 30, 2010, 5:55 AM

    I think the question is, what purpose does it serve? I think a good writer can make a scene horrifying without giving every detail. It’s almost thinking of yourself as an editor working on a movie–when do you cut away? Do you give just enough detail to make it real, or try to make the viewer suffer a bit? Spielberg did an amazing job creating fear without showing the shark for most of the running time of Jaws. And that was by necessity–the mechanical shark wouldn’t work right most of the time. Similarly, maybe the rules of Christian fiction should be taken as a challenge that a good writer can overcome.

    • Mike Duran August 30, 2010, 6:58 AM

      Mark, I agree that “a good writer can make a scene horrifying without giving every detail.” But does that mean we should never give the gory details? By the end of Jaws, there was enough blood and body parts to make the viewer understand the monster was real. Well, I also want my readers to know… the monster is real. Thank you for joining the fray, Mark. Grace to you!

      • Mark H. August 31, 2010, 5:30 AM

        It sounds like you and I agree in principle. Enough detail makes it real. Too much makes it gratuitous. The line dividing them, unfortunately, is subjective.

  • Word Lily August 30, 2010, 5:59 AM

    Yes, the term is definitely relative. What’s “edgy” to one reader is tame to another.

    I’ve run into a couple instances in my recent reading where CF’s Tell Imperative was so obvious it pulled me completely out of the story. I wish it was as easy as: Just write the story. Write it well.

  • Bruce Judisch August 30, 2010, 6:12 AM

    Mike,

    Your points are very well taken and I don’t think we’re as far apart in our philosophy of writing as perhaps I lead you to believe in my post. Most of my comments–particularly the one concerning “getting away”–were from my point of view as a reader, not necessarily a writer. However, having said that, as an author, I’m motivated to write stories that I’d like to read and write them in such a way as I’d like to read them–so there is a gray-shaded relation. Hence, my publisher, while a Christian house, is not CBA-bound.

    I hope I didn’t communicate that I am an advocate to “sanitize stuff, avoid stuff, tone down stuff, tiptoe around stuff, and make sure things turn out okay.” Nothing could be farther from the truth. I agree wholeheartedly with your view on that. I’ve also walked away from CBA books that are overtly guilty of candy-coating “awkward” themes.

    I mentioned in my comment that I try not to shy away from realism as a writer. My most recent release is based in 8th-century BC Assyria, and is actually rather stark in its portrayal of sensual, but historically accurate, themes such as temple prostitution and the grit and horror of battle–especially battle as the Assyrians were reputed to have conducted it.

    Deciding what themes to address and deciding how to address them are two different things, as you know. I think that might be a discriminator in our respective posts. Fortunately, avoiding anachronisms helped me around “hell” and “damn” in my 8th-century BC work. 🙂 However, my WIP does carry that consideration.

    I work in a military environment, so I appreciate your comment regarding ambiant language. As a writer, I have no delusions that by omitting foul language from my book I’m somehow going to get soldiers to stop cussing. That’s not my point for excluding profanity when I write. I just don’t like it, so I’d tend to try to deliver the fact that a gangster has a foul disposition without laying his exact verbiage out on the page. Purely subjective. Not being excessive, as you rightly say, should be avoided, but, again, “excessive” is relative, too.

    Thank you for bringing up this subject. I genuinely appreciate and, to a great extent, support your position, although there are certainly some differences in our respective approaches. I’ve had these same types of discussions on secular writers’ forums, and some of them were not nearly as gracious and thoughtful as you were in your response.

    Thanks again for the opportunity to comment. You’ve got a neat site here. Keep asking the hard questions. 😉

    Cheers! Bruce

  • Bruce Judisch August 30, 2010, 6:17 AM

    Word Lily,

    “Just write the story. Write it well.”

    Amen! Thank you. 🙂

    Not that I’m in imminent danger of hijacking this thread, I’ll sit down and be quiet now…

    Cheers! Bruce

  • Kevin Lucia August 30, 2010, 6:19 AM

    Again, Mike – I want to comment, but you’ve said so many good things I agree with I’m struggling to come up with something better than “what he said!”

    Here’s the key element in your argument, for me:

    “We are taught as writers to SHOW not TELL. But if you’re a Christian author, that doesn’t always apply. You see, SHOWING certain things can get you into trouble. “

    It comes down to choice, in my mind. Craft over doctrine (which yes, I know, may put a bulls-eye on my forehead, but so be it). The elements of craft call an author committed to quality writing to avoid weighty exposition “telling” us about situations, and to SHOW us these things, make it as active and vivid as possible.

    However, all of us have to ask ourselves this: what do we wish to inspire in our readers? What images – which are so powerful, or else pornography wouldn’t be such a devastating addiction – do we want to leave behind?

    I wrote a sex scene for my current novel. The character was desperately alone, reaching out, and also lost. This was a desperate act by two scarred people. It FIT with the story and characters.

    So. I wrote it. Felt the scene was very well written.

    Perhaps too well written. And I asked myself: is THIS something I want to inspire in readers? An image I want to leave them with? And I decided for myself that it wasn’t, removed it, and admittedly changed the scene to the classic “James Bond-fade to black”.

    However, one the main characters in the novel is a stripper, and there’s a scene in a strip club. Feeling inspired by the above decision, I RADICALLY toned down that scene…but kept it. It’s so central to the story, it HAS to be there.

    I think it calls for a very DEEP study into the craft itself to find answers. Regarding the gore, horror, violence and whether to show too much or not, I quote this from a recent interview with author F. Paul Wilson (http://www.repairmanjack.com):

    “1. Paul, you’ve said you don’t believe in gore on the page. You prefer to make the gross/horrific stuff happen in the reader’s head. Would you tell us more about that and why it works so well?

    I tend to go by the maxim that less, if done properly, is more. I’ve been through med school and a rotating internship that included surgery. I’ve dissected a human body and I’ve been up to my wrists in blood in someone’s open abdomen. Blood and gore don’t get to me. I’m more disturbed by what I don’t see.

    Remember the little girl in The Leopard Man banging on the door to her house to be let in because something was following her? Remember how you thought she’d get safely inside, but she didn’t? Remember how she screamed and went silent? Remember the blood flowing under the door?

    I do. And in my mind I saw worse things happening than Jacques Tourneur could ever have shown on the screen. I first saw that scene in the 1950s and I still haven’t forgotten it.

    Consider this scene from FATAL ERROR, the most recent Repairman Jack novel: I’ve got a bad guy tied up in a van. He has info he’s not giving up. It’s an improvised situation. The person who’s going to get that info arrives with a paper bag labeled “Ace Hardware,” gets in the van, and closes the door.

    I don’t need to take you into the van for the details. The Ace Hardware bag is unsettling, but what’s really chilling about the scene is that the person with the bag is an ordinary housewife whose little boy was seriously hurt by this man. No fury like a woman scorned … but a scorned woman’s fury can’t hold a candle to that of the mother of a brutalized child. No, you do not want to be in that van.”

    This where I am in my writing. Less is more, if done right. But I’ll admit, and am willing to admit this is a CRAFT choice for me, not doctrine.

    Link for full interview: http://joannaslan.blogspot.com/2010/08/its-my-story-damn-it-interview-with-f.html

    • Bruce Judisch August 30, 2010, 6:33 AM

      Well put, Kevin. There’s an intensely acute element to subtlety, oxymoronic as it seems.

    • Mike Duran August 30, 2010, 6:43 AM

      I totally agree, Kevin, that “suggested” horror (or sex, criminality, violence, etc.) can be very effective. Which is why I prefer “psychological” horror over gore. And from a craft perspective, you’re right — it takes more skill to be effectively “suggestive” than to be explicit. Nevertheless, I think there are times when explicit scenes can punctuate our stories.

      When I was reading your comments, for some reason I kept thinking about the movie Paranoid Park, from Gus Van Sant. I loved that movie! Atmospheric, thoughtful. And disturbing. Mainly because of one scene, near the middle of the film, where a man was accidentally killed in a gruesome way. The filmmaker showed everything, an overhead shot even, albeit quickly (probably no more than two seconds). That image stuck in my brain and rattled me for the next few days. I couldn’t shake it. It nailed the story into place in a way that not showing it, couldn’t have. Was it explicit? Yes! Was it necessary? Absolutely!

      Kevin, thanks so much for your thoughts. I really appreciate you taking time to visit and comment here!

  • Michelle Sutton August 30, 2010, 6:20 AM

    Edgy Christian fiction is a tough sell. How do I know? No bigger publishing houses would pick up my novels because of the “showing” I do. The best example is Never Without Hope. It’s on camera adultery in all of it’s reality, both good and bad. And it’s the woman doing the cheating. I’m told by readers it’s the edgiest book out there. And she doesn’t just see the guy and sin once. No, it’s more like six or seven times, and yes, all in the book. Then when her husband finds out, her life explodes in her face, some not nice names are used (yes, bad ones) and I think I captured reality pretty well. You should try it. I’m told it’s the edgiest there is out there in the Christian reader’s world. Reviews on Amazon seem to concur. Just sayin’. I also have a showing “rape” from what the gal remembers (but she was so drunk when it happened it’s still a bit fuzzy) in It’s Not About Him. I’ve had some people say my YA books are too edgy. Teens who read a lot, however, see them as mild compared to secular books. Who knows…?

  • Nicole August 30, 2010, 7:45 AM

    So do you think some Christian fiction is genuinely “edgy”?
    Some, yes. But again to repeat your premise: edgy is not equally defined by people, both Christian and unbeliever. One person’s “edgy” is another person’s “fluff”.

    Do you agree that the term is relative?
    Yes. By your own definition above you referred to “edgy” implying an edge as in a cliff. Which would also imply that you get right to “edge” of that cliff and teeter there without going over it, but you also implied you prefer toppling over the edge in some cases.

    Do you think Christian fiction can get any “edgier” and still remain “Christian”?
    Definitely. But not all of it. Some of it isn’t designed to approach the edge. For the escapist readers, the “sheltered” readers: right or wrong, for the fluff readers–they need their stories, too. Some readers have been over the edge in their lives and can’t handle experiencing it again.

    And do you think it’s possible to remain true to a story without sometimes showing explicit elements?
    Yes with some stories. Depends on the genre. Depends on the intent of the author.

    It’s often a Catch-22, isn’t it, Mike? What some view as explicit just isn’t to others. What some view as over-the-top gratuitous just isn’t to others. I just don’t think it’s fair to put parameters on the incidentals, but then what’s incidental to one isn’t to another. And the beat goes on . . .

  • Jessica Thomas August 30, 2010, 8:39 AM

    “These books might be ‘edgy’ in relation to CBA standards, but as someone who works in the construction field and reads pretty widely, they really aren’t.”

    Heh heh.

    There was a lot of hype over the violence in “The Passion of the Christ.” While I didn’t enjoy watching it, I needed to see it. Why? I needed to see it to truly understand the physical and emotional agony Christ went through. I’ve only watched it once. If I watch the movie again, I may shut my eyes. To some it may seem “gratuitous”, but it served a purpose for me and I’m sure many others.

    I’ve been avoiding the news lately, but the other day I finally read about the floods in Pakistan and looked at the pictures. It was painful to read and to look at those images, but sometimes we have to. Most of us in the US have warm beds and hot showers (not all). We can easily surround ourselves with all that is comfortable and tell ourselves we are living a “pure” life. Are we living pure lives or are we shielding ourselves from the often horrendous pain of this world? We can’t dwell on pain constantly, but we need to be reminded. Otherwise we forget to love the lost and the needy.

    As for the people you counseled and the issues they were facing, I have no doubt. It’s around us more than we think. People who feel stuck in those situations need to know they aren’t alone…that no sin is unforgiveable…that someone else understands and has experienced the rawness of their pain. That rawness can be expressed in fiction. It may not make us comfortable, but it’s situational truth. And it’s the kind of stuff God looks at 24/7.

  • David A. Bedford August 30, 2010, 9:45 AM

    My father was a pastor and missionary for some 60 years. You can believe he heard everything possible from the people he ministered to. I heard about some of it growing up, but certainly not all and that’s as it should be. The behaviors you mention certainly happen, but that doesn’t mean everyone needs or wants to hear all about it.

    What makes a book Christian is that its author is a believer. All authors, Christian or not, should deal with important themes of universal significance. To be true to the faith, Christian authors should write whatever they write about redemptively. It has been proven that nothing is taboo to put into a book, so no one has anything to prove any more. Write what you are given to write.

    A brief note on “show, don’t tell.” That’s absurd. It works for TV and movie scripts. Novels must always combine showing and telling. Just look at the Harry Potter books, especially the later, more complex ones.

    Please visit my blog and leave a comment. Thanks!

    • Kevin Lucia August 30, 2010, 2:00 PM

      A brief note on “show, don’t tell.” That’s absurd.

      I’m going to have to politely disagree with you on this, David. As far as I’m concerned, good fiction uses “show” as little as possible. Does that imply that lots of fiction sold today isn’t written very well? Sure. I’m comfortable with that assertion.

  • Michelle Pendergrass August 30, 2010, 11:50 AM

    The problem is not with the term “edgy” Christian fiction. I think it is more of an internal problem with some of the Christians. Especially the ones who want to dictate and control the moral compass of the general population of other Christians.

    The difference I’m beginning to see when I compare CBA and “secular” fiction is that CBA is so enmeshed that for whatever reason one sub-genre cares (and is vocally loud and brash) about what another sub-genre is doing. When I go to a horror conference (just got back from one) there aren’t Harlequin writers there telling me the stories we print are too disturbing, scary, bloody, deliquent. And I’m not going to an RWA conference telling them they’re selling smutty, fru-fru, girly crap.

    So.

    If that were the case within CBA, these discussions wouldn’t be relevant.

    But it also doesn’t help that agents within the CBA walls tell people “Christian horror will never be a reality in the CBA” then ask people to write stories within the genre–and in the same breath tell authors they shouldn’t be chasing the market.

    What the CBA needs is a huge dose of reality.

    • Mike Duran August 30, 2010, 12:47 PM

      Michelle, I think your point about CBA sub-genres being “enmeshed” is important. In fact, I think the largest sub-genre in the Christian market — women’s fiction — pretty much dictates the standards for the other sub-genres. Because the market is geared to those 80% women’s fiction buyers, we simply import their guidelines. Like it or not, this is why it’s reasonable to approach Christian fiction as one single genre.

  • Michelle Pendergrass August 30, 2010, 12:51 PM

    Because, of course, women *only* read women’s fiction. Just like they stay home, bare-footed and pregnant, cooking for their man, serving him diligently, rubbing his feet after his hard day at work, minding their manners, keeping their mouths shut, wearing their dresses, drinking tea in pretty little cups, keeping their house clean, and being June Cleaver.

    Because, of course, being a Christian woman should look like Mrs. Cleaver in Leave it to Beaver land.

    Oh wait. Is my sarcasm leaking again?

    • Jessica Thomas August 30, 2010, 1:02 PM

      🙂

      (I’m working while my husband is home with the toddler…and dinner will be ready when I get home.

      Actually, that’s not necessarily how I want it. I’m just trying to learn to accept it. So, yeah…I hear ya…I feel a bit of an outcast at times.)

  • RJB August 30, 2010, 3:52 PM

    This blog post is getting way to edgy for me 🙂

    The problem is that we are trying to universally define something that me and my closest friends can’t even agree on.

    I hate rules, so the only thing I can say to you all as a reader, is that

    a) There is definitely a line that I don’t want crossed in my CF.
    b) I can not define that line. I only know it once I read it.

  • Jay August 31, 2010, 5:54 AM

    Eesh. Where to land on this?

    A part of me wants to say “show anything and everything, if the story calls for it,” (save for the prurient things that make p0rnography what it is). Most of us commenting here live in an insulated culture that is free from much of the physical violence and suffering that has plagued the world in less developed times. Most of us don’t even kill animals for our own food anymore. An argument could be made that Christians are doing the rest of the world a disservice by NOT reminding us of our collective potential for depravity — a potential that has been mitigated by the Western rule of law, affluence, and technology.

    The other part of me wonders how much we’re trying to please non-Christians instead of pleasing God. Are our stories reflective of some truth, theological or natural, or are we just going for the cheap sell for the itching ears (eyes)?

    The former part of me is winning out, because the gospel is offensive enough already without having to super-Christianize our writing. It doesn’t work, anyways…how much better are Tolkein’s LOTR or Lewis’ (severely unnoticed) space trilogy than Left Behind? Trying to be too sanitized doesn’t offend; it just bores everyone else.

    • Kevin Lucia August 31, 2010, 6:29 AM

      The other part of me wonders how much we’re trying to please non-Christians instead of pleasing God.

      I’ve heard this A LOT, and it frustrates me, a little. (Not at you, Jay. Just in general). I couldn’t care a less what the “world” or “non-Christians” think of my work, up to this point: that I’ve told a good story that engages in “suspense of disbelief” and makes people believe the tale, is something they can relate to. Now, that opens a whole OTHER can of worms about trying to predict readers’ likes and dislikes, so we won’t even go there, BUT…

      I don’t want to “show” a lot and be “edgy” because I want to please the world or make a quick buck (anyone IN publishing, even with bigger houses, knows that money is scarce these days for everyone). To be quite frank, if I find that my storytelling fits in at a CBA house I’d love to publish exclusively with them, because what I’ve seen so far in my brief immersion in the secular market, from a business standpoint, makes me shudder. With the exception of a few small presses – Shroud, Apex, to name a few – I’d much rather do publishing business with most Christian houses than secular houses.

      It has to do with ME as a writer and person. My life hasn’t been easy. No bed of roses. No tragedies either, but 90% of CBA novels don’t even engage ME – a life-long Christian raised in a fundamental Baptist home – because I can’t even believe most these people exist. Maybe I’m a little moody as a person, also; and that’s reflected in my work.

      Plus, my fiction is DRIVEN by my creative impulses (which again, we could argue that a Christian writer should be driven by doctrine only), and when I feel that drive shackled, it no longer becomes fiction or art. It becomes a homework assignment, and I cancel out. Which is why, quite frankly, I very rarely read CBA books. I just check out.

      But its ME. My life. My experiences. My fears, my failures, mistakes, my WORST NIGHTMARES – along with my hopes and dreams and love and victories and faith – that drive my writing. NOT a desire to “sell out”. No offense to you Jay, but I really think that defense is getting old, and is flimsy.

      I remember one of the very few CBA novels that knocked me askew. “Visitation”, by Frank Perretti. At the time, it was the most challenging, DIFFERENT CBA novel I’d read. Talking to a fellow Christian about it, my friend made a slightly disgusted face and said, “Eh. Weird book. Seems like he was working out some of his personal issues, in that one.”

      Of course. And I, for one, can deal with that. Almost prefer it, as long as the author’s personal issues don’t overwhelm the dictates of the story.

      • Jay August 31, 2010, 4:33 PM

        “No offense to you Jay, but I really think that defense is getting old, and is flimsy.”

        No offense taken, since it wasn’t really a defense from me, just the “other side” to where I was leaning.

        • Kevin Lucia August 31, 2010, 4:56 PM

          Cool. I just didn’t want you to think I was gunning it at you…

  • Brenda Jackson August 31, 2010, 7:02 AM

    Yowza! I checked back to see comments and see there are a ton. I’m going to have to set aside some time this week to come back and read them all. If it’s feasible to do it here, can we narrow the “edgy” conversation down to one concrete book? I really am trying to understand the “edgy” argument.

    Wholly apart from these discussions, someone recommended Charles Martin to me, and this author was mentioned in this blog post. I just finished reading “Wrapped In Rain” (general fiction). It’s published by WestBow (2005)–I am uncertain if that’s considered a secular imprint or not. Though it is a divison of Thomas Nelson. So to give me a concrete example, if you’ve read this book, do you consider it edgy and why? Or why not?

    • Mike Duran September 1, 2010, 6:36 PM

      Brenda, I haven’t read Charles Martin, though I’ve heard many good things about his writing. As far as how edgy he is, I couldn’t say. I know some of his books are published by Thomas Nelson. So them being “Christian” probably limits the explicit elements significantly. At least, that’s my guess. Thanks for staying with the conversation!

  • Jason Joyner August 31, 2010, 7:48 AM

    Oooh. Lots of good stuff here from Mike and all the commenters! After lurking and watching for a day, here are some thoughts.

    Mike, I think the answer is you need to write an edgy Amish novel! Preferably with vampires. Sparkly ones need not apply. Or a zombie mash-up ala the new Jane Austin versions!

    I wish we could rename some of this. For the people who like the nicer stories that are clean and uplifting, I’d like to see the term “inspirational fiction” used for them. The term Christian fiction is too vague. It’s like Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) – it encompasses musicians from Phillips, Craig, and Dean to Switchfoot to Skillet. How can CCM be a genre? I personally can’t stand PCD, but I’m sure a lot of their listeners don’t want to crank up Skillet. It goes back to the sub-genre comments, which were good points. Of course, then what do we do with the “Christian fiction” label?

    because the gospel is offensive enough already without having to super-Christianize our writing. It doesn’t work, anyways…how much better are Tolkein’s LOTR or Lewis’ (severely unnoticed) space trilogy than Left Behind? Trying to be too sanitized doesn’t offend; it just bores everyone else.

    I *like* this comment Jay. We walk a tightrope. We can offend Christians if we don’t toe the doctrinal line, but Jesus is a stumbling block and offense to the world. We are going to struggle in this. It is inherent in this niche.

    One last thought – if the fiction is going to be “gritty” or “edgy”, then it needs to do it well. I reviewed one book where the bad guy is doing all sorts of gory stuff. It didn’t match the overall tone of the book and wasn’t done well. I’ve never been able to forget how that killed the story itself for me.

  • Eddy August 31, 2010, 9:29 AM

    Great post! I’ve said it before, but I love the conversations going on in this blog. They resonate pretty strongly with me. This question is something I struggle with in my own writing. I am a follower of Christ but I also feel the need for authentic fiction (kind of a funny word combo, I suppose) in the sense that the characters and their stories must be real, or the whole thing will be contrived.

    When I was interviewing around Texas to be a youth minister, I remember being sidelined by a parent board who asked me if I watched rated R movies. My response was the same as it always has been: if the book of Genesis – which includes incest, rape, adultery, murder, and the destruction of most of the human race – was made into a movie, it would be stamped with an R rating, no question. The Bible doesn’t shy away from these characters and all of their wretchedness, so I don’t know why our writing should, either.

    Obviously, there is a line in there somewhere that crosses over into gratuitous, but it’s the same as any other part of writing – when does it serve the writing, and when does it not?

  • r keith rytaran August 31, 2010, 10:20 AM

    how this for edgy? i wrote a novel entitled Euclid Avenue Our scars mean something. in actuality, it is about my life, the 1st 24 yrs, however it is written in the true novel genre in that it has no proper names, dates or specific locations. the book begins at the age of 4 when i discovered my dead baby brother’s body floating face down in the bathtub. the remaining childhood years were filled with parental neglect, deceit, theft and manipulation. full time employment began at age 12. the teenage years were characterized by experimentation to habits to addictions that culminated in a wager that resulted in a loveless marriage that ended in divorce and nearly in death. finally, an outrageous conversation leads to redemption.
    excerpts can be read on facebook in the photo album, the profile page and on bookdaily.com. the book is available through amazon, barnes & noble, books & co, books-a-million and others.
    the culprit in the drowning incident is still alive and at large even though the 50th anniversary of the death is next year.

Leave a Reply

Next post:

Previous post: