Comments on: Labels

By: Scott

Scott — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 00:22:20 +0000

Certainly good words and echoed by a lot of what I’ve read on the subject. This is really a big help. Thanks for stopping by Christie!

By: Christie

Christie — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:46:32 +0000

This is my first time dropping by your blog, but I thought I would comment on this…by quoting someone far wiser than myself.
Madeleine L’Engle wrote an excellent book about faith and art, called Walking on Water, and in it she wrote, “Christian art? Art is art; painting is painting; music is music; a story is a story. If it’s bad art, it’s bad religion, no matter the subject.”
And I tend to agree with her.

By: Scott

Scott — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 03:33:25 +0000

Thanks Dan!
Dave – I can always count on you for a laugh and honesty. Thanks.

By: DAVe

DAVe — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 03:22:04 +0000

Just write and forget labels, Labels are stupid and people who use them probably are too. I am also unable to support either of my accusations.

By: J. Daniel Sawyer

J. Daniel Sawyer — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:02:09 +0000

I’m afraid my opinion of Pereti is still quite uncharitable. He’s a good writer, but I’ve never been impressed with it as anything beyond pulp thrillers with a preachy overlayer. Some Christian artists I do respect profoundly: u2, Kansas, Tolkien, Kevin Smith (in his better work), John Grishham, or your friend and mine Chris Lester – all of them very good at what they do, all of whom deal thoughtfully with ethical and philosophical issues, none of whom (except for some of U2′s weaker work) set about preaching or who manipulate their audiences into contrived epiphanies.
Best of luck in your endeavor
-Dan Sawyer
Author of the Antithesis series and Sculpting God
Both available at http://www.jdsawyer.net

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 23:34:24 +0000

JD – “Do you mean charity? Or grace? Or ethics? Or doctrine? Of all of these, only the latter is of special interest only to Christians or those who study Christianity.”
All of the above really and no I don’t want this to be only accessible to the Christians out there. This is what I strove to do with Archangel and I succeeded (at least I and the listeners I’ve heard from think so).
“A general interest adult fiction magazine, explicitly dedicated to Christian themes (which you haven’t defined yet), written exclusively or mainly by Christians, and featuring very low levels of sex and potentially offensive language.”
Just to clarify it would be specualtive, not general fiction and the only stipulation I’ve made in the submission guidelines over at the site regarding offensive content are as follows:
The rating on your story should shoot for PG or PG13. This means that some swearing, violence, or sexual situations are acceptable. Life is messy. People swear and do all sorts of regrettable things. Stories we publish will reflect that. On the off chance we get a really fantastic story that pushes the envelope, we may still accept it. Violence/sex/swearing for the sake of it or for shock value won’t make the cut, it must serve the story. We will certainly accept G rated “family friendly” stories, but even those will be the exception.
Much of what you say about Christian “art” is true and I want to fix that at least in what I produce and am responsible for. I may miss the mark, but that’s where I’m shooting.
“It seems to me that if you’re wanting to create something that is family safe and spreads the gospel, then you’re not creating art, you’re creating a vehicle for propaganda.”
I’m not interested in it being family safe or in it preaching. I’m not trying to create things like Left Behind, but closer to things by Ted Dekker and Frank Peretti (only better).

By: J. Daniel Sawyer

J. Daniel Sawyer — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 23:26:25 +0000

I meant “The Bible, by contrast to the so-called ‘Christian’ value system.”

By: J. Daniel Sawyer

J. Daniel Sawyer — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:55:50 +0000

“Issues relevant to the Christian faith” — this is one of those phrases that means something to the sayer, but not much to the hearer. Do you mean charity? Or grace? Or ethics? Or doctrine? Of all of these, only the latter is of special interest only to Christians or those who study Christianity.
Following you on twitter and reading your post here, I think you’re trying to achieve the impossible: A general interest adult fiction magazine, explicitly dedicated to Christian themes (which you haven’t defined yet), written exclusively or mainly by Christians, and featuring very low levels of sex and potentially offensive language. Honestly, I don’t think it can be done.
Much of what bears the label “Christian” is, with VERY rare exception, artistically timid and culturally ghettoized – to plagiarize many a preacher, it’s “of” the world without being “in” the world, which is the worst of both possible worlds. Even comparatively brave and well-edited forums like The Mars Hill Review rarely come off as doing something other than preaching to the choir.
The reason is, I think, a pretty simple one. The so-called “Christian” value system is artificial and life denying. The Bible, for all its flaws, is chock full of idealogical controversies, graphic sex, epic violence, harsh language, scandal, witchcraft, and all manner of other interesting and unsavory things, and it has most of these things present without rendering them into moralistic parables. It’s just there, as a normal part of life. Sometimes with good or bad consequences, sometimes with neither.
If you want to create a forum for serious idealogical discourse through fiction that deals with themes you consider Christian but aren’t explicitly concerned with doctrine, you might do better creating an editorial policy that solicits stories dealing with the themes you’re interested in. It seems to me that if you’re wanting to create something that is family safe and spreads the gospel, then you’re not creating art, you’re creating a vehicle for propaganda.
One theologically literate atheist’s opinion, for what it’s worth, Good luck with your project, whichever way you go with it.
-Dan Sawyer
Author of the Antithesis series and Sculpting God
Both available at http://www.jdsawyer.net

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:15:07 +0000

Reed – You make good points as well and I want the content to shine. That’s largely why I did decide to ditch the label in any highly visible places on the podcast page. The thing is, when I am seeking new fiction for this cast I want it to be clear that I am in fact seeking a sub-genre of speculative fiction, that dealing with Christian fic. I’m looking at this more as a publisher/producer than artist.

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:10:05 +0000

Sid – I think there’s room for a post on that down the pike. It’s just hard to let go of a label that has meaning to me and some others, good meaning.

By: Scott

Scott — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 22:07:19 +0000

Fred – Labels can certainly be lazy, no doubt. They do serve a purpose though and occasionally even a good one. Of course it’s worth noting that according to scripture the label Christian was put on us by others in the first place. I tend to (I hope) write interesting, but hard to categorize things, but when I go looking for new stuff I often search for it in subgenres. Proper labeling does make things easier to find/market.

By: Reed Porter

Reed Porter — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:56:26 +0000

Whether to label a piece as Christian or not depends on the work’s content and intent. If it is a work of fiction about people who are Christian, but are living lives of interest to people of many walks, why pigeon-hole it as Christian fiction?
There is a story that Pres. Wilson was at a barber shop when another man came and sat in the other chair. The man showed interest in what the barber was saying and ‘elevated their thought.’ Not until Wilson saw the man get up and leave did he realize he was the evangelist D L Moody. Moody inspired and ministered without having to announce his faith. We all know he was not afraid to identify himself as a Christian, but he did not need to. He was salt and light either way. Mt 5:13-16 Let it shine.

By: sidfaiwu

sidfaiwu — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:31:22 +0000

No sex?!? Damn.
Really, I do think Dekker makes a good point in his post – a label is only as good as it accurately describes the work to the people interpreting the label. This is a very pragmatic approach, but I’d suggest not using a label if it is ineffective at accurately conveying your content. If it doesn’t work, ditch it; just like Dekker ditching the ‘gay’ label after it no longer conveyed the intended meaning.

By: Fred van West

Fred van West — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:03:24 +0000

Labels are inherently misleading. We use them because we’re lazy and we don’t want to dig deep (After all, why else would so many corrupt politicians be returned to office each year; people vote labels like (R) and (D). Well, if you want to label your work, you’re simply catering to the marketing machine that segments your work and pigeonholes it into a place on the shelf. Sure, a man has to eat, but why not write things that are interesting, but hard to categorize rather than writing to achieve a label? Jesus’ sayings are religious, philosophical, political and practical. If he were alive today, I think we’d find his words hard to label, as well.