by Jason Joyner | Feb 23, 2011 | Blog, CSFF, fiction, Mike Duran, writing craft
Okay, so I’m in the minority in this one.
Yesterday I gave my review for The God Haters by Bill Myers, in which I didn’t have a great opinion of the book. It seems that a majority of the CSFF Tour is enjoying the book. There are a few that REALLY love it, a wider majority that likes it a lot, and there are a couple of stragglers with me saying “Meh.” (I love to say “meh” even when I don’t have a reason for it. Meh.)
That’s alright. Everyone’s going to have an opinion, and I admire what he tried to do, and he’s published way more books than me, so take this for what it is.
I followed The God Hater by reading The Resurrection, the debut novel from internet buddy Mike Duran, and the subject of next month’s CSFF tour. The back-to-back reading was an interesting contrast to me.
Bill Myers said in a Q&A in the back of his book that he likes to have a significant quiet time each morning with God to seek ideas about his writing. He seems to write books directed at opening Biblical truth in new ways via fiction. This is my take at least, and I consider it an admirable goal.
Mike Duran has been blogging for quite a while at Decompose, and he is a strong proponent of the “art first/message second” school of thought.
I mentioned yesterday that there seems to be two philosophical schools in CBA fiction (and in Christian entertainment in general, i.e. film, music, etc.). One way has a message or theme that they craft a story around, and the other comes at a story open-ended, and in the creative process the theme works out from that. Of course these are simplifications and these type of things never fit neatly into a specific box.
I would say that there was a different tactic taken by the two authors I’m contrasting. My perception is that Myers was inspired to write a story that presented God’s logic as a creator through an imperfect vessel, an atheist professor, and had to weave around that framework. I would guess Duran asked a question: What would happen if a resurrection happened today, and wrote his story exploring that a little more open-ended.
I’m not trying to say one way or the other is right. I would say that there are potential pitfalls with both approaches. Myers’ book is a loose allegory, and to try and work a Biblical tale into modern fiction is a difficult task. An author really has to nail it to make it work. I think Francine Rivers has done that very well with her book Redeeming Love, which is mentioned often as a great book that is a Western take on the story of Hosea. I’ve also seen books written closer to Duran’s work that don’t make a strong statement one way or the other on its premise, which is a let down to a reader.
I remember a heated debate in the mid 90’s (yes, way back then) when the editor of CCM Magazine slammed the latest album by Carman, considering it to be inferior art and only a vehicle for preaching a message with a beat associated with it. The two sat down in an interview and cleared the air, but it was an interesting event nonetheless. I do side more with the editor, because I think Christian art (whether fiction, music, or film) gets a bad rap when we produce weak product but sell it because it is “ministry.” Brandilyn Collins is a prolific suspense author that has been praised by Publishers Weekly. She has said many times her job is to entertain first, but as a Christian author she gets to put in truth to varying degrees based off what fits the story, which only adds depth to what she is doing. I like this statement, and I would say it sums up my philosophy well.
I can’t really state where either author comes from. I can only give my opinion and relate it to the idea of how do we write. The two different novels served as a jumping off point is all. Obviously The God Haters didn’t work for me, but I also don’t like those that get sanctimonious about a work of art being inferior. Give your opinion, but don’t take it personal. I’ve seen other Christians get on their high horse over such issues. I wish Bill Myers much success in his writing career. But I won’t be passing it on to other readers either.
If you’re curious about The Resurrection, I’ll have a review of it for my next post. If you want to see what the other tourmates are saying about The God Maker, check out Becky Miller’s blog, as she keeps track of all the posts for the tour. The CSFF tour is always enjoyable in seeing the varying opinions, so check them out!
—
by Jason Joyner | Feb 23, 2011 | Blog, CSFF, fiction, Mike Duran, writing craft
Okay, so I’m in the minority in this one.
Yesterday I gave my review for The God Haters by Bill Myers, in which I didn’t have a great opinion of the book. It seems that a majority of the CSFF Tour is enjoying the book. There are a few that REALLY love it, a wider majority that likes it a lot, and there are a couple of stragglers with me saying “Meh.” (I love to say “meh” even when I don’t have a reason for it. Meh.)
That’s alright. Everyone’s going to have an opinion, and I admire what he tried to do, and he’s published way more books than me, so take this for what it is.
I followed The God Hater by reading The Resurrection, the debut novel from internet buddy Mike Duran, and the subject of next month’s CSFF tour. The back-to-back reading was an interesting contrast to me.
Bill Myers said in a Q&A in the back of his book that he likes to have a significant quiet time each morning with God to seek ideas about his writing. He seems to write books directed at opening Biblical truth in new ways via fiction. This is my take at least, and I consider it an admirable goal.
Mike Duran has been blogging for quite a while at Decompose, and he is a strong proponent of the “art first/message second” school of thought.
I mentioned yesterday that there seems to be two philosophical schools in CBA fiction (and in Christian entertainment in general, i.e. film, music, etc.). One way has a message or theme that they craft a story around, and the other comes at a story open-ended, and in the creative process the theme works out from that. Of course these are simplifications and these type of things never fit neatly into a specific box.
I would say that there was a different tactic taken by the two authors I’m contrasting. My perception is that Myers was inspired to write a story that presented God’s logic as a creator through an imperfect vessel, an atheist professor, and had to weave around that framework. I would guess Duran asked a question: What would happen if a resurrection happened today, and wrote his story exploring that a little more open-ended.
I’m not trying to say one way or the other is right. I would say that there are potential pitfalls with both approaches. Myers’ book is a loose allegory, and to try and work a Biblical tale into modern fiction is a difficult task. An author really has to nail it to make it work. I think Francine Rivers has done that very well with her book Redeeming Love, which is mentioned often as a great book that is a Western take on the story of Hosea. I’ve also seen books written closer to Duran’s work that don’t make a strong statement one way or the other on its premise, which is a let down to a reader.
I remember a heated debate in the mid 90’s (yes, way back then) when the editor of CCM Magazine slammed the latest album by Carman, considering it to be inferior art and only a vehicle for preaching a message with a beat associated with it. The two sat down in an interview and cleared the air, but it was an interesting event nonetheless. I do side more with the editor, because I think Christian art (whether fiction, music, or film) gets a bad rap when we produce weak product but sell it because it is “ministry.” Brandilyn Collins is a prolific suspense author that has been praised by Publishers Weekly. She has said many times her job is to entertain first, but as a Christian author she gets to put in truth to varying degrees based off what fits the story, which only adds depth to what she is doing. I like this statement, and I would say it sums up my philosophy well.
I can’t really state where either author comes from. I can only give my opinion and relate it to the idea of how do we write. The two different novels served as a jumping off point is all. Obviously The God Haters didn’t work for me, but I also don’t like those that get sanctimonious about a work of art being inferior. Give your opinion, but don’t take it personal. I’ve seen other Christians get on their high horse over such issues. I wish Bill Myers much success in his writing career. But I won’t be passing it on to other readers either.
If you’re curious about The Resurrection, I’ll have a review of it for my next post. If you want to see what the other tourmates are saying about The God Maker, check out Becky Miller’s blog, as she keeps track of all the posts for the tour. The CSFF tour is always enjoyable in seeing the varying opinions, so check them out!
—
by Jason Joyner | Feb 22, 2011 | Blog, christian fiction, reviews, speculative fiction, writing craft
Welcome back to the CSFF Tour for February. This month’s featured book is The God Hater by Bill Myers.
For a synopsis, check out yesterday’s post introducing the book.
This book fits a “speculative fiction” category by supposing that we can build an artificial computer world, with completely independent artificial intelligence, that can be used to see how humanity will respond to variables and make better predictions.
My prediction is that this book will do well with general Christian fiction (specifically CBA readers). And that is perhaps a shame.
This book is written for a purpose. It has a specific aim – to show the logic God used in creating our world and the need for divine intervention (per the Questions to the Author in the back of the book). The book is designed to be a challenge to the New Atheists who are challenging Christian belief with old arguments and renewed fervor. It is a noble purpose, certainly. From a personal standpoint I would love to see it succeed.
Reviewing it for artistic purposes is another story.
Often Christian art is considered to be in one of two categories: it is made with creativity as the primary goal, and the theme taken from the book is incidental, or it is made with a message as the anchor, and the story is conceived and created around it. I don’t think it is necessarily bad to have a book written with the second point as the motivation, but it means that the story will require a very deft touch to make the work stand on artistic merits, apart from the theme (however holy it may be).
The God Haters, in my opinion, fails to rise above the forced preconceptions and stand as a quality piece of fiction. The story suffers from several flaws. The characters are generally 2D cut-outs, created to hold a place in the story without much depth or empathy. The Christian professor Annie escapes this to a degree, but she doesn’t carry enough of the story to overcome the other flat people. He uses several writing techniques that jarred me out of the imaginary world he was attempting to create, from using parentheses for several asides to a character with an annoying vocal tic (“bro!”). There were also a couple of scientific mistakes that threw me as a biology major, but that is me being overly picky.
The suspense and plot is pulled along well enough, and isn’t all that bad. It just isn’t all that good either. I didn’t get bored, but I wasn’t invested in what was happening. There are some touching moments as he delves into the computer simulation and the professor’s avatar gains more and more compassion for the “creation,” but it is too little, too late to save the book. A major issue seems to be that the book is too short to give the depth needed to make everything more believable. Perhaps it would be a different story if it had the length to give the depth required.
The book gives the whole back copy to quotes of endorsements. There’s no place to get a synopsis of the book, and I think that will be a disservice to readers as well.
I don’t like to give such negative reviews, but I have to be honest in my impression of a book to have some integrity as a reviewer. Christian art can be especially tricky, because the charge can be brought that I’m harming a brother in their ministry or something similar. Like I said, I admire the intent, and wish it could have worked out better. It was an ambitious project, but my opinion is that it isn’t a great book for those looking for a story with in-depth characters and a carefully crafted plot. If you’re looking for a book to shore up your Christian beliefs, then this book would be entertaining enough. I wouldn’t recommend it to a non-believer, but I really won’t be recommending it anyway.
If you make it past this gloomy review, tomorrow I want to talk about the issue of art and theme raised by this book, and compare it with another recent read.
I did receive a copy of this book from the publisher for review purposes, and was obviously not required to give a positive endorsement in exchange for the book. The opinions are my own.
Oh, and check out my tourmates at Becky’s blog for the latest and greatest from the others in the CSFF Tour.
—
by Jason Joyner | Feb 22, 2011 | Blog, christian fiction, reviews, speculative fiction, writing craft
Welcome back to the CSFF Tour for February. This month’s featured book is The God Hater by Bill Myers.
For a synopsis, check out yesterday’s post introducing the book.
This book fits a “speculative fiction” category by supposing that we can build an artificial computer world, with completely independent artificial intelligence, that can be used to see how humanity will respond to variables and make better predictions.
My prediction is that this book will do well with general Christian fiction (specifically CBA readers). And that is perhaps a shame.
This book is written for a purpose. It has a specific aim – to show the logic God used in creating our world and the need for divine intervention (per the Questions to the Author in the back of the book). The book is designed to be a challenge to the New Atheists who are challenging Christian belief with old arguments and renewed fervor. It is a noble purpose, certainly. From a personal standpoint I would love to see it succeed.
Reviewing it for artistic purposes is another story.
Often Christian art is considered to be in one of two categories: it is made with creativity as the primary goal, and the theme taken from the book is incidental, or it is made with a message as the anchor, and the story is conceived and created around it. I don’t think it is necessarily bad to have a book written with the second point as the motivation, but it means that the story will require a very deft touch to make the work stand on artistic merits, apart from the theme (however holy it may be).
The God Haters, in my opinion, fails to rise above the forced preconceptions and stand as a quality piece of fiction. The story suffers from several flaws. The characters are generally 2D cut-outs, created to hold a place in the story without much depth or empathy. The Christian professor Annie escapes this to a degree, but she doesn’t carry enough of the story to overcome the other flat people. He uses several writing techniques that jarred me out of the imaginary world he was attempting to create, from using parentheses for several asides to a character with an annoying vocal tic (“bro!”). There were also a couple of scientific mistakes that threw me as a biology major, but that is me being overly picky.
The suspense and plot is pulled along well enough, and isn’t all that bad. It just isn’t all that good either. I didn’t get bored, but I wasn’t invested in what was happening. There are some touching moments as he delves into the computer simulation and the professor’s avatar gains more and more compassion for the “creation,” but it is too little, too late to save the book. A major issue seems to be that the book is too short to give the depth needed to make everything more believable. Perhaps it would be a different story if it had the length to give the depth required.
The book gives the whole back copy to quotes of endorsements. There’s no place to get a synopsis of the book, and I think that will be a disservice to readers as well.
I don’t like to give such negative reviews, but I have to be honest in my impression of a book to have some integrity as a reviewer. Christian art can be especially tricky, because the charge can be brought that I’m harming a brother in their ministry or something similar. Like I said, I admire the intent, and wish it could have worked out better. It was an ambitious project, but my opinion is that it isn’t a great book for those looking for a story with in-depth characters and a carefully crafted plot. If you’re looking for a book to shore up your Christian beliefs, then this book would be entertaining enough. I wouldn’t recommend it to a non-believer, but I really won’t be recommending it anyway.
If you make it past this gloomy review, tomorrow I want to talk about the issue of art and theme raised by this book, and compare it with another recent read.
I did receive a copy of this book from the publisher for review purposes, and was obviously not required to give a positive endorsement in exchange for the book. The opinions are my own.
Oh, and check out my tourmates at Becky’s blog for the latest and greatest from the others in the CSFF Tour.
—
by Jason Joyner | Nov 24, 2010 | Blog, CBA, decency, edgy, fiction, writing craft
Hello again. I’ve been trying to work more on my novel in progress, and have been dealing with a little blogger’s block. I’ve had a few thoughts, but haven’t known how to get them out. Time to get back on the horse!
So is it possible to have edgy AND decent fiction?
This has been a run-around topic for CBA fiction for a while. Christian fiction has been evolving over the last several years, perhaps not as fast as some would like, as there continues to be a debate about “edgy” Christian fiction. In fact, the term has become so loaded it is hard to define. For this post consider “edgy” as portraying real life without any filter on it (CBA is known for no cussing and no intimate scenes, not even between spouses).
By the way, I was partially inspired by Mike Duran’s blog deCOMPOSE because he offers a lot of thought-provoking content, usually about the state of Christian fiction. A recent post asks, “Am I responsible for what my characters say?” with the question being, “If my character says something mean, racist, sinful, etc., am I responsible or is the character responsible.” He also had a well-noticed post about “Christian fiction and the new edgy”. That post noted that some people’s edgy are other people’s obscene.
How can obscene be decent?
Perhaps “decent” is a loaded word too, considered a Puritan standard that isn’t realistic in our day and age. Maybe I’m looking at the word wrong, or using the wrong term. I’m thinking of decent as in the motivation one is using when writing something that may be edgy.
Much of our current pop culture fare comes with a shock value intended to gain notice. The edginess is just to catch people’s attention. Britney Spears continued a trend from Madonna, then Katy Perry picked up the baton with songs like “I Kissed a Girl,” and this was quickly followed by Lady Gaga and her wild antics. The motivation on doing something is, quite frankly, only to gain some kind of attention in our oversaturated world.
All media forms are subject to this, from movies, comics, books, TV…the list goes on. The motivation is caught between catching attention and/or flaunting old standards.
Is it possible to write something challenging, edgy, without leaving behind decency? I’d better use an example. I picture a story involving a rough-edged detective and a prostitute trapped in her circumstances that doesn’t pull punches showing the rawness of their lives. The point of the story is not to wallow in dirt, but to show the contrast of redemption against such bleak context. The motivation is good. The details are not used in a gratuitous manner, but to paint an accurate picture. The author keeps a standard of decency in their heart, writing things to serve the story rather than to shock, even if it means some cursing, a closer look into the prostitute’s life, or the violence on the streets.
Maybe I’m reaching with this. I don’t expect stardard CBA fare to embrace this of course. But is it possible to be honest with where the story needs to go, show just the details that are needed to establish credibility without wallowing in it, and keep a pure heart? I think so. I really believe a lot of what is done in pop culture is for the purpose of vulgarity alone, without adding value to the final product other than saying, “Look at me! I am worse than the last guy!”
I’m not even the guy that would want to read all of this. But as Mike has said before, showing someone violating God’s standards can be a powerful tool, even if it is uncomfortable reading about it.
Am I making sense? Am I out there on this one? Hey, your thoughts on this would be most appreciated!
—
by Jason Joyner | Nov 24, 2010 | Blog, CBA, decency, edgy, fiction, writing craft
Hello again. I’ve been trying to work more on my novel in progress, and have been dealing with a little blogger’s block. I’ve had a few thoughts, but haven’t known how to get them out. Time to get back on the horse!
So is it possible to have edgy AND decent fiction?
This has been a run-around topic for CBA fiction for a while. Christian fiction has been evolving over the last several years, perhaps not as fast as some would like, as there continues to be a debate about “edgy” Christian fiction. In fact, the term has become so loaded it is hard to define. For this post consider “edgy” as portraying real life without any filter on it (CBA is known for no cussing and no intimate scenes, not even between spouses).
By the way, I was partially inspired by Mike Duran’s blog deCOMPOSE because he offers a lot of thought-provoking content, usually about the state of Christian fiction. A recent post asks, “Am I responsible for what my characters say?” with the question being, “If my character says something mean, racist, sinful, etc., am I responsible or is the character responsible.” He also had a well-noticed post about “Christian fiction and the new edgy”. That post noted that some people’s edgy are other people’s obscene.
How can obscene be decent?
Perhaps “decent” is a loaded word too, considered a Puritan standard that isn’t realistic in our day and age. Maybe I’m looking at the word wrong, or using the wrong term. I’m thinking of decent as in the motivation one is using when writing something that may be edgy.
Much of our current pop culture fare comes with a shock value intended to gain notice. The edginess is just to catch people’s attention. Britney Spears continued a trend from Madonna, then Katy Perry picked up the baton with songs like “I Kissed a Girl,” and this was quickly followed by Lady Gaga and her wild antics. The motivation on doing something is, quite frankly, only to gain some kind of attention in our oversaturated world.
All media forms are subject to this, from movies, comics, books, TV…the list goes on. The motivation is caught between catching attention and/or flaunting old standards.
Is it possible to write something challenging, edgy, without leaving behind decency? I’d better use an example. I picture a story involving a rough-edged detective and a prostitute trapped in her circumstances that doesn’t pull punches showing the rawness of their lives. The point of the story is not to wallow in dirt, but to show the contrast of redemption against such bleak context. The motivation is good. The details are not used in a gratuitous manner, but to paint an accurate picture. The author keeps a standard of decency in their heart, writing things to serve the story rather than to shock, even if it means some cursing, a closer look into the prostitute’s life, or the violence on the streets.
Maybe I’m reaching with this. I don’t expect stardard CBA fare to embrace this of course. But is it possible to be honest with where the story needs to go, show just the details that are needed to establish credibility without wallowing in it, and keep a pure heart? I think so. I really believe a lot of what is done in pop culture is for the purpose of vulgarity alone, without adding value to the final product other than saying, “Look at me! I am worse than the last guy!”
I’m not even the guy that would want to read all of this. But as Mike has said before, showing someone violating God’s standards can be a powerful tool, even if it is uncomfortable reading about it.
Am I making sense? Am I out there on this one? Hey, your thoughts on this would be most appreciated!
—
