Are Christian publishing houses EASIER than secular?

Depends on the house, I think. On the whole, since most of the bigger ones are now imprints of secular publishers, I'd say they're about equal. My own novels, for instance, went through quite a few pubs before they found a home. And even after that, the editing there was fairly rigorous.

I'm not greatly experienced here in wooing publishers, but it seems that the mode of publishing (traditional, subsidy, self, etc.) would have more to do with the acceptance rate than the secular/non-secular distinction. I dunno, I may be wrong.

I think Christians are an easier sell for mediocre stories. Which is weird, given, y'know, the Bible. But Christian bookstores can't get enough pseudo-challenging pap, and publishers fill the gaps in the markets like all good capitalists.

Sad, but probably true...

McDuff said:

I think Christians are an easier sell for mediocre stories. Which is weird, given, y'know, the Bible.

Click to expand...

That's an interesting thought, McD. It's sad to admit, being a Christian, but I guess the proof is in the publishing when you survey what's on the shelves, eh?

I'm always dismayed by the elitist view of literature -- any literature.

I didn't like the Left Behind series (couldn't finish the first book) but thousands of people did. What makes my opinion better than theirs? Just because other people look for different things in their choice of reading material, doesn't make it inferior. Just because a lot of Christian literature is affirming rather than challenging, doesn't make it "pap".

Christian publishers, like all publishers, attempt to provide books they think people want to read. Given the success of many CBA publishers, they must be doing something right.

From what I hear it was that way in the past, but that standards have improved greatly over the years.

The number of Christian fiction writers (especially romance) has increased so much that the competition for the book slots has become very tough.


Roger, I only read the first few LB books too-- I prefer stories that are character-driven (as in romance) but these were strictly plot-driven. And I know that's what a lot of folks like in a book--lots of action.

Hey, you're looking at a guy with a Britney Spears ringtone here. I'm all open to the "lots of people liked it" argument in most cases. However, the fact is that although the people may well be doing "something" right, that doesn't mean what they're doing is producing good literature. They're pushing a product whose selling point is not literary merit.

Just because a lot of Christian literature is affirming rather than challenging, doesn't make it "pap".

Click to expand...

Sure it does. "Pap" isn't bad -- the word just means soft food for babies or the infirm. In some contexts, pap is good for you. In very few cases is it objectively bad for you. It's just not very interesting and healthy, adult humans generally need something more in their diets.

As far as Left Behind goes, it's not just bad because it's "plot driven". It's bad because it's plot driven and the plot makes no sense. I mean, the premise of the storyline is that you could have a nuclear apocalypse that doesn't kill anyone and then every child on earth would vanish overnight, but the most important story that The World's Best Investigative Journalist (who never does any journalism) could follow is a speech made in the UN by the President of Romania. I mean, what the hell? Where does that make sense? We don't care about the president of Romania now!

In their effort to make the events in the plot follow the weird-ass prescriptions of the postmillennial dispensationalist prophecies, they forget to make any of the points in the plot follow each other. It's kinda the flip-side of the writing spec christian submissions (or erotica), where you're writing a romance without kissing or dancing and you get something which fulfils all the relevant criteria but is, frankly, pap.

This is not to say it's bad product. It's just that what makes the product "good" to the target demographic is not "well told stories."

It's amusing that the flocking of Christians to anything Christian not only made the absolutely shocking writing of Left Behind, but also the appalling writing of The Da Vinci Code (it's my opinion that they're both bad for mostly the same reasons, but Dan Brown is a marginally better writer than LaHaye).

If you can get the Christian demographic to shout about you one way or the other you can produce any old toot, it seems. When the content of the books is irrelevant (as it was in Brown's case) the quality is hardly on the radar. The support (or opposition) comes down to agreement (or otherwise) with stated ideas or concepts within the text, around which one can form a popular movement or an outrage. Amazingly, the fact that outrages are always the opposite of successful as far as getting people to ban or boycott the works doesn't seem to dissuade people from getting outraged by the next terrible thing.

Roger J Carlson said:

I'm always dismayed by the elitist view of literature -- any literature.

I didn't like the Left Behind series (couldn't finish the first book) but thousands of people did. What makes my opinion better than theirs? Just because other people look for different things in their choice of reading material, doesn't make it inferior. Just because a lot of Christian literature is affirming rather than challenging, doesn't make it "pap".

Christian publishers, like all publishers, attempt to provide books they think people want to read. Given the success of many CBA publishers, they must be doing something right.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure making an observation--generic or specific--that is less than positive is necessarily being elitist. Holding an opinion doesn't mean you consider it superior to someone else's; indeed, opining that someone's position is elitist seems to me to carry the same nuance as the opinion being judged. Please forgive me if I misunderstand or am taking the tag a little too personally.

Neither do I believe that what might make a piece of literature 'inferior' is driven by readers' tastes. Is there a standard, then, that can claim to make this call? What do the Christie Awards use as defining criteria? (I honestly don't know) Are they elitist in not giving awards to everyone, even within a given category? Does not recognizing that something is the "best" imply there are those that are not, that there are some less deserving of note?

I don't see affirming and challenging as mutually exclusive modes. Together, they're like a great meal--you walk away full and satisfied. Apart they're like a big meal--you walk away full. (Perhaps you didn't mean that.)

I certainly agree that publishers do indeed seek to satisfy the market; they're business concerns like any other. Commercial success, though, doesn't always equate to quality output. The most-visited Internet sites are a testimony to that.

Sorry (genuinely), Roger, if this seems a bit brusque. I appreciate all your posts; this one just tripped me up a little.

Standing by to be rebuked!

McDuff said:

However, the fact is that although the people may well be doing "something" right, that doesn't mean what they're doing is producing good literature. They're pushing a product whose selling point is not literary merit.

Sure it does. "Pap" isn't bad -- the word just means soft food for babies or the infirm. In some contexts, pap is good for you. In very few cases is it objectively bad for you. It's just not very interesting and healthy, adult humans generally need something more in their diets.

Click to expand...

BruceJ said:

Commercial success, though, doesn't always equate to quality output.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, there is no objective standard for "good literature", "literary merit", and "quality output". Different people read for different reasons. Some read to be intellectually challenged. Others read simply to escape, to read about interesting characters doing exciting things. Still others read for emotional involvement.

Many Christians read Christian literature to simply affirm their faith rather than challenge it. Perhaps it's not what you enjoy in literature, but it is what they enjoy. No one yet has answered my question: What makes your opinion better than theirs?

The elitism I was referring to is the attitude by some who believe that ONLY what they enjoy in literature has value while elements that other people enjoy are worthless. In other words, pseudo-challenging pap.

Pap, by the way, when applied to ideas means an "idea, talk, book, or the like, lacking substance or real value."

I'm not trying to rebuke anyone. But consider that there may be people here who thoroughly enjoy the kind of fiction you can find at a CBA bookstore. To be dismissive of them and the kinds of literature they enjoy is not only wrong, but hurtful.

Roger J Carlson said:

No one yet has answered my question: What makes your opinion better than theirs?

Click to expand...

I believe I did answer your question: "Holding an opinion doesn't mean you consider it superior to someone else's..." Clearly you hold an opinion because you think it's right, otherwise you wouldn't hold it; however, there need be no element of superiority/elitism in it. Reading for affirmation is fine. Reading for challenge is fine. Neither is necessarily superior to the other (the synergism of both together could be debated, though). But this is not a quality assessment; it's a genre/sub-genre preference.

I still don't see where a macro-level observation on quality leads to "...the attitude by some who believe that ONLY what they enjoy in literature has value while elements that other people enjoy are worthless." Again, what is enjoyed--based upon the affirmation vs. challenging context--is a sub-genre preference, not a quality assessment.

I thoroughly enjoy some of the literature you can find at a CBA bookstore. I'm not being dismissive of anyone. Neither am I being dismissive of the genre/sub-genre selection at the bookstore. The original comments were quality observations, not genre-related.

Christian pubishers.

All I can say is that if you think it's easier to sell a Christian novel, then try writing one. One man's pap is another's masterpiece, and the competition at Christian publishers is just about as stiff as anywhere else. And getting stiffer all the time.

All publisher gives reader what the majority of readers want, written in a way the majority of readers want it. This isn't capitalism, it's customer satisfaction.

Every Christian I know reads Christian fiction for the same reason SF readers read SF. . .because it's entertaining. The fact that the "message" may be different has zip to do with quality or merit. There is no more merit in reading something that questions your beliefs than in reading something that affirms you beliefs, and no more merit in writing either.

But I can tell you this without doubt. If you do not respect Christian fiction, then selling a Christian novel is probably not just difficult, it's impossible.

Dan Brown is a bad writer, but also not an honest one. LaHaye is at least honest, and I don't think nearly as poor a writer as many try to make out. I've read far worse writers from every secular publisher out there.

Content matters, and because you don't approve of the content doesn't make it any less important, any less valuable, or of any less literary merit.

Some of the best, and most famous writers throughout the ages, including today, have written solely Christian novels, from a Christian standpoint.

Roger:

Unfortunately, there is no objective standard for "good literature", "literary merit", and "quality output".

Click to expand...

Indeed there isn't, but this does not mean that there are no such things, or that it is meaningless to discuss them in and of themselves. Something distinguishes Foucault's Pendulum from lolgurl76's online epic Harry and Ron visit Lolgurl's house for tea! (for example). And, after all, we are on a writer's forum, are we not? We are (mostly) all capable of stringing one word after another in a sentence, but being here we're theoretically interested in the art of it, in the craft of storytelling. Surely there is some skill to it or none of us would be here? If we could all just write down whatever popped into our heads and if publishers picked it by roulette wheel, there'd be no point to this forum at all. But we can't and they don't and so there is, and what we're here discussing is the commonality within the subjective but nonetheless quite recognisable property of "literary quality."

No one yet has answered my question: What makes your opinion better than theirs?

Click to expand...

My opinion isn't better than theirs. I'm saying that what they're looking for in a book is different from what I look for in one -- obviously -- and what they're not looking for is, obviously, not an exhibition of skill and craft in storytelling. Something doesn't have to be "challenging" to be good, but in my opinion it should in some way engage your brain. There is secular literature which just rolls by without doing so, of course there is, but there seem to be a lot of examples of such scattered around Christian bookshops. It's the kind of mediocrity that seems borne of satisfying certain demands of a specific type of reader and hence alienating those not in that group. It's a similar effect to, as I said, erotica. Everything within these genres has something which transcends the norm (The Story of O, for example) but, by and large, even competently written examples of these specific subgenres specifically exclude other people.

But consider that there may be people here who thoroughly enjoy the kind of fiction you can find at a CBA bookstore. To be dismissive of them and the kinds of literature they enjoy is not only wrong, but hurtful.

Click to expand...

I don't see why they should be hurt, unless their self worth is tied completely to the idea that whatever they read must be a scintillating work of fine literature but don't shop around or do any real reading. I'm not dismissing them, and nor am I dismissing people who read porn or superhero comics. I'm only being dismissive of the idea that Hustler Readers Letters #452 is right up there with The Story of O.

Jamesarichie:

LaHaye is at least honest, and I don't think nearly as poor a writer as many try to make out. I've read far worse writers from every secular publisher out there.

Click to expand...

Really? Like who? The guy's appalling.

Some of the best, and most famous writers throughout the ages, including today, have written solely Christian novels, from a Christian standpoint.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but they're not exclusively available through Christian bookshops. I'm not talking about Chesterton or Lewis or even Peretti (the Christian Grisham). There's just a lot of erotica on the shelves of your Christian Bookshops.

Jamesaritchie said:

All I can say is that if you think it's easier to sell a Christian novel, then try writing one. One man's pap is another's masterpiece, and the competition at Christian publishers is just about as stiff as anywhere else. And getting stiffer all the time.

All publisher gives reader what the majority of readers want, written in a way the majority of readers want it. This isn't capitalism, it's customer satisfaction.

Every Christian I know reads Christian fiction for the same reason SF readers read SF. . .because it's entertaining. The fact that the "message" may be different has zip to do with quality or merit. There is no more merit in reading something that questions your beliefs than in reading something that affirms you beliefs, and no more merit in writing either.

But I can tell you this without doubt. If you do not respect Christian fiction, then selling a Christian novel is probably not just difficult, it's impossible.

Dan Brown is a bad writer, but also not an honest one. LaHaye is at least honest, and I don't think nearly as poor a writer as many try to make out. I've read far worse writers from every secular publisher out there.

Content matters, and because you don't approve of the content doesn't make it any less important, any less valuable, or of any less literary merit.

Some of the best, and most famous writers throughout the ages, including today, have written solely Christian novels, from a Christian standpoint.

Click to expand...

Agreed, James. I do respect Christian fiction. I've written one Biblical historical novella and am in the middle of a follow-on novel and it's mostly what I do read in the way of fiction. Interestingly, the primary criticism the first beta reader of my initial manuscript made was that there was too much dialogue and that she wants to "learn something" when she reads a Christian novel. The entertainment factor is very important (the primary motivation for me, too), but there are always those who look for more.

I haven't read Dan Brown, so I can't comment. I had no real problem with Jerry Jenkins stylistically, I just grew weary of the Left Behind plot line and seemingly overly drawn-out series (just my opinion).

Agreed also on the motivation for publishers; however, the bottom line is important to them, too. Customer satisfaction translates into that. Not a cynical point of view, I think, just a different angle.

Thanks for the post. I think Inspie is right that the quality is improving. Hopefully this and future generations of writers debating these very points will continue to do something about them.

Oh, by the way, can I just say:

All publisher gives reader what the majority of readers want, written in a way the majority of readers want it. This isn't capitalism, it's customer satisfaction.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you think capitalism is, but, um, it's that. There. That you just described.

McDuff said:

My opinion isn't better than theirs. I'm saying that what they're looking for in a book is different from what I look for in one -- obviously -- and what they're not looking for is, obviously, not an exhibition of skill and craft in storytelling.

Click to expand...

This is precisely the elitism I'm referring to. If someone doesn't read for the same reasons you do, then it's "pap", childish and of no real value. I've no problem with you expressing your preferences in reading, but please refrain showing your contempt for people who differ.

Yes, I said contempt. I realize this is a subjective judgement, but as the moderator of this forum, it is my judgement to make.

Roger, try to understand that I'm a) not talking about the totality of Christian literature and b) there really isn't contempt here. I have no problem with people reading that kind of thing, same as I have no people reading erotica, books with dragons and scantily clad maidens on the front, or watching "American Pie" movies and "Days of our Lives" style soap operas. I'm not contemptuous of their choices. Nor am I contemptuous of those who choose to write about Christianity in fiction -- for God's sake, my avatar here is G K Chesterton, most famous for writing short stories about a Catholic Priest Detective (although they are not his best writing).

I don't know what you want me to say here. All I'm saying is that generic straight-to-paperback Christian fiction of the type that stacks the shelves of your average Christian bookstore and never sees space in a regular store where it has to compete with all the other writers out there is, generally, easily digestible, simply written, unchallenging and often, as someone who isn't me said above, written with "the most easily offended grandmother" in mind. I used to work in a Christian bookstore, I've read -- or at least skimmed and got bored with -- a great deal of this stuff. It's not of the same quality as Umberto Eco or Graham Greene. It's just as valid as a literary product, and it's totally acceptable to read if you dig that kind of thing. But the general quality is right up there with Mills and Boone. Most of it's OK, it'll get you to the end of the book maintaining a mild interest in the protagonist, and then it'll be over and you'll forget about it immediately - never mind going out and telling your friends "you have to read this", you'll never read it again either.

Days of Our Lives is not as well written as The Sopranos, because the people who watch daytime soaps aren't watching for the writing. I don't know why it's perceived as being contemptuous of people to point this kind of thing out. To me, it seems like the alternative is either to say Days of Our Lives and The Sopranos are equally well written, which is ludicrous on its face, or that it doesn't matter whether either of them is better written than the other because making a judgement about that is mean to the audience, which is also ludicrous. And I don't know anyone who watches soaps who'd claim that they are watching them because every episode is brimming with top-drawer writing, or who would even disagree with me that the writing ain't exactly sparkling. Why is it so unkind to point out that exactly the same market forces seem to be at work happens in Christian fiction?

DPTA: I, also, am a bit confused as to why Brown is "dishonest" and Lahaye and Jenkins are "honest." Last time I heard someone try that in an argument they were arguing from a Randian point of view, and if that's going to happen here my hands, they are flung in the air.

I'll just speak for myself here ... Let's look at just the Christian Fiction realm, since that seems to be what we're focusing on. The frustrating thing isn't the fact that there are lots of "simplistic" novels (let's take the Left Behind series for example). They're not inheriently inferior - they meet the needs of many consumers. My wife loved that series and she's read dozens of Bodie Thone books. I love my wife, ergo, I'm grateful that those books are available to enrich her life. They're not my cup of tea, but that's cool.

The frustrating thing for me is the lack of diversity within the genre; the lack of risk-taking and the seeming lack of innovation. I've mentioned in other posts how the Christian Fiction section in any given store is rarely larger than three racks and those three are dominated by a small handfull of authors. That's great for readers who like the mainstream, but personally I like to read fiction that blows my mind or otherwise engages and challenges my intellect or impacts me on a visceral level. Same thing with Christian mainstream music, but that's a parallel discussion.

I consider myself more of a "counter-mainstream culturist" than an "elitist" although, if I'm being honest, yeah, I'm guilty of being an elitist on many occasions. I appreciate everyone's remarks on this thread; it's encouraging me to be more aware of my own elitism and how it can be unintentionally hurtful.

In the end, we're writing because we have something we want to add to the human library. I'd like to add to the diversity of the Christian Fiction genre. I aint gonna set the genre on fire and redefine the market, but I want to help expand it and offer my story to someone who's looking for it.

McDuff said:

for God's sake, my avatar here is G K Chesterton

Days of Our Lives is not as well written as The Sopranos,

Click to expand...

First of all, I thought your avatar was Winston Churchill. All white people look the same to me.

Secondly, great points. I finally figured out the other day why women love soap operas (I know this is straying from the point, but it was a great revelation to me.) It's because the men TALK to the women like they actually CARE about what's going on. It's the ultimate female fantasy and none of the stupid plot lines even matter. You never see a guy on a soap opera trying to watch TV and ignoring the woman blathering behind him; he's always fully engaged and passionate about the conversation.

But that's why I love the Sopranos - guys like to view ourselves as Tony - we're strong and potent but somehow we keep getting mired in everyday life ... but we're still strong and potent!

Plot Device said:

Of the writing of many books, there is no end.


I believe when we get to Heaven, there will be BOOKS by the GAZZILLIONS for us to read for all eternity. And some of them will have been written by humans.

Click to expand...

But will we still get royalty checks from the publisher?