She was the turning point that de-Christified novels. From that moment forward it became more "not done, old sod" to mention His name, or to pray (though who, in foxholes does not, and table-graces would have been naturalistic touches), or to go to confession.
It was done deliberately, and by the usual suspects.
You've provided clarity to the posture I've taken from the start in my art. "Writing to market" has led to prophetic writings (I speak of course of their tremendous impact, ignored) being, ironically, silenced.
I've said for a long time that many folks operating in the publishing industry say they want to discover the next [BIG NAME] or [BESTSELLER], but the reality is that most of them are working schmucks like me. I'm doing my best here to avoid a rabbit trail into the whole "deadpub" thing. Fact is, people need to eat, and I don't think the iconic Christian authors of yesteryear would be welcomed into today's "market" for precisely the reasons you allude to. I remember getting annoyed about this when I read the part in Fellowship that explains what happened to the ponies after they were sent away, thinking to myself, I would NEVER be permitted traditionally publish that.
But you're correct as well to point out the nebulousness of "Christian" art. It's a whole posture from which to do art at all, not a checklist of required tropes. It's "marketability" that created this weird dichotomy in the first place.
You had some real bangers in this one—subterranean and seismic. Keep it up!
Heidi. Hans Brinker. Anything prior to Alcott.
She was the turning point that de-Christified novels. From that moment forward it became more "not done, old sod" to mention His name, or to pray (though who, in foxholes does not, and table-graces would have been naturalistic touches), or to go to confession.
It was done deliberately, and by the usual suspects.
You've provided clarity to the posture I've taken from the start in my art. "Writing to market" has led to prophetic writings (I speak of course of their tremendous impact, ignored) being, ironically, silenced.
I've said for a long time that many folks operating in the publishing industry say they want to discover the next [BIG NAME] or [BESTSELLER], but the reality is that most of them are working schmucks like me. I'm doing my best here to avoid a rabbit trail into the whole "deadpub" thing. Fact is, people need to eat, and I don't think the iconic Christian authors of yesteryear would be welcomed into today's "market" for precisely the reasons you allude to. I remember getting annoyed about this when I read the part in Fellowship that explains what happened to the ponies after they were sent away, thinking to myself, I would NEVER be permitted traditionally publish that.
But you're correct as well to point out the nebulousness of "Christian" art. It's a whole posture from which to do art at all, not a checklist of required tropes. It's "marketability" that created this weird dichotomy in the first place.
You had some real bangers in this one—subterranean and seismic. Keep it up!
DRM