Reading outside your comfort zone?

[michaelsnyder]

Okay, sorry, me again...starting yet another thread...

The discussion about POV/tense sparked another thought in my wee little brain.

How many of you guys/gals intentionally read outside your comfort zone? And I'm not talking about a regimented "It's time for my bi-annual perusal of 2nd person/future tense/rabid monkeys on acid sampling..."

Maybe the question is how experimental is your reading (as a writer, mostly)? I guess another way to phrase the question would be, do you find ways to stretch what you expose yourself to even though it may not be in your wheelhouse as far as sheer enjoyment? Do you ever find yourself reading some book to 'see what all the fuss is about', something that would not normally be found on your shelf?

Okay, enough of me. And thanks again.

Mike

[rljfl]

Good question. I acutally finally started reading Anna Karenina for this reason. I figured, it's a "classic" that everyone loves, I should try it. So far, not really winning me over with the "love it" crowd.

[Tarin]

I'm an extremely eclectic reader - and I love it! !thumbsup! The only genre I consistently read is the classics. I read about a book a week, and I try to alternate classics with something more "modern." When it comes to modern selections, however, the field is wide open. One never knows what I'll bring home from the library.

As far as the effect it's had on my writing... I can only imagine it's been good. I know I feel broader and more rounded a person (mentally, that is :p), and I love the fact that I have so many elements to draw on for my own writing. So, yes, I emphatically recommend reading outside your comfort zone!

[righter1]

I'm dramatically opposite from Tarin...

I have a comfort zone and rarely get outside of it. I have a hard time picking up new authors unless they're bestsellers or recommended to me by friends that I know have similar tastes to mine, or have been recommended by some of my favorite authors. My biggest jump lately was to pick up a copy of 'The Princess Bride' to read, which I really have enjoyed, although I'm not done with it yet.

I'm trying to get better at wandering the library or bookstore and being willing to pick up a new author, but I still rarely get outside of the mystery genre, as I dislike most historical's, romances, and westerns, and only like certain types of fantasy or sci-fi stories and am very unlikely to try unknown authors in those genres.

[Timber Wolf]

Good question. I acutally finally started reading Anna Karenina for this reason. I figured, it's a "classic" that everyone loves, I should try it. So far, not really winning me over with the "love it" crowd.

I finally read The Three Musketeers after seieng the Nth film remake about 10-12 yrs ago. Would like to read Count of Monte Christo as well as The Man in the Iron Mask. Probably others that I can't list at this point.

I read stories written and placed in today, placed in the future, written in 1800s - 1900s, written in a variety of styles, placed in a variety of locales and times (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Edgar Rice Burroughs, Jules Verne, H.G. Wells). Don't know if I've gone back earlier than that, on a regular basis - No Moby Dick, no Tolstoy, etc.

Not sure what you mean by reading out of your comfort zone.

I also have books on ancient Greece / Rome, as well as having an interest in Ancient Britain, Gaul, etc.

I don't usually read current books just because they are in the news.

[Tommie Lyn]

Like righter1, I rarely get outside my comfort zone. I zealously protect my "escapism" time between the covers of an enjoyable read.

However, a moderator in one of my writers' groups recommended Janet Evanovich's Stephanie Plum novels, I read one, enjoyed it and got hooked on the series.

I'd heard quite a lot of hype about James Patterson, I read his "Cross" and will never read another of his books. It seemed a very tired, old plot, i.e., abused child grows up to be a serial killer, yada, yada, yada -- boring. But I could have forgiven that. What I couldn't forgive was his neglecting a bit of backstory. His prologue started when his two children were babies and his wife was killed. The story picks up when those two children are teenagers, but, lo and behold, there is a five year old child in the family, too. No word of explanation as to where that child came from. It threw me out of the story every time he mentioned the child -- I'd stop and go back through the earlier chapters, searching for an explanation I'd missed. A sentence or two of backstory would have prevented that.

And I once determinedly slogged my way through almost 900 bloated pages of a Stephen King book. Never again.

[righter1]

I'd heard quite a lot of hype about James Patterson, I read his "Cross" and will never read another of his books. It seemed a very tired, old plot, i.e., abused child grows up to be a serial killer, yada, yada, yada -- boring. But I could have forgiven that. What I couldn't forgive was his neglecting a bit of backstory. His prologue started when his two children were babies and his wife was killed. The story picks up when those two children are teenagers, but, lo and behold, there is a five year old child in the family, too. No word of explanation as to where that child came from. It threw me out of the story every time he mentioned the child -- I'd stop and go back through the earlier chapters, searching for an explanation I'd missed. A sentence or two of backstory would have prevented that.


Backstory is key in a series. I'll agree with that. Although, I've read a handful of Patterson's stuff, and some of his stuff is really pretty good.

John Sandford's Prey series is interesting. Most if not all take place in Minneapolis/St. Paul, and when I go up there in a few weeks, I want to take one or two of his books with me to read them in the actual setting. :) But, that's another story... and a bit of thread hijacking.

[Merry]

Well, I stepped really far out of my comfort zone and read this book about a guy with a fiance that wouldn't quit and he had this crotchety neighbor...and a dog..but there were no zombies...how the hell do you tell a story without zombies?

Just messing with ya Mike.

I read non-fiction when I don't want to be comfortable. Mainly science. I've read many of Isaac Asimov's non-fiction works (do you realize Jupiter is a star? Cool!) and I read this one book titled 'The Big Bang Never Happened.' It was an atheist thesis on why the universe is an eternally, perpetuating organism and why time doesn't work in a uniform pattern through out. The author concluded that even religion should be happy with this concept. Uh....

Religion, maybe, but not Christianity.

I used to be a concert violinist and books on acoustical physics still fascinate me. It's amazing how the combination of resonating overtones and harmonics have a physical effect on the listener. You're not imaging it, the music really is doing something to you.

And I even read Origin of Species, which belongs in the fiction section. Holy smokes, what a turgid torrent of tepid speculation! Especially when you go back and research his grandfathers book. Erasmus Darwin wrote a book called Zoonomia (no, I'd rather not have whatever he was having) which, gosh, oh golly, says the very same thing young Charles said in his then, 'brand new research.' Can you say 'Plagiarizer grandpa,' boys and girls, I know you can...'

And if evolution is true, then could monkeys have evolved from men rather than vice versa? Oh, wait, sorry, that question alone could get you...Expelled! oh, God Bless Ben Stein.

I tried reading a Harlequin romance, gave up, no way. I looked up one of the books the last agent who rejected my Mike Malone novel represented and read it, then I felt a little better about the rejection.

I'm going to make, force, twist my arm and pick up a historical novel, because I just don't read them. I'm more like one of those 1,000 page Stephen King types. (900 pages? Sounds like one of his short stories..Lol!)

[tlm]

When I was in college I was constantly out of my comfort zone, Shakespeare, Faulkner, and Ray Bradbury back to back. That was just one semester. Now that I am older I am much more settled, but I do need to read some new Michael Crichton. I haven't read anything by him in a long, long time.

[Tamera]

I'm working on getting out of my comfort zone to become a better writer. But it's hard. Reading fiction has always been my comfort zone.

The books I've read recently that I wouldn't normally read are:
Karen Kingsbury Redemption Series - Not a fan of romance or women's fiction
The Thirteenth Tale - I know everyone's raving about it, but I'm having a hard time reading it because it's boring. Nothing really happens. Guess I'm not big on contempary literary fiction either.

Genres That I Find Comfort In:
historical
western - I bet that didn't surprise anyone.
adventure
classics

[wgjones3]

Okay, Mike. First rule of CW, don't apologize for starting threads. Got it?

I read Mary Shelley's Frankenstein once, simply because it was a classic and I wanted to 'get it'. I hate that book, not because of the story--I found the story very beautiful in a tragic, nightmarish way--but because the author's voice was so... dusty. It was a laborious read.

I think books like that are kind of like wine. It's an acquired taste. Just last week I had to plow through eight chapters of a mergers & acquisitions text, and that was easier than Frankenstein. No joke.

But yeah, I do venture outside my comfort zones occasionally. The most memorable was a book my mom bought back when she was in her twenties. Some dimestore paperback novel. It was definitely a YA book, written in '58 I believe. It was the story of a preppy girl and the greaser boy she fell in love with one spring, how her parents didn't understand and ultimately separated them, how she fell in love again but still looked back fondly on the rebel who stole her heart. The whole story is cliche, a blatant rip-off of Rebel Without a Cause, but it was a neat read. And definitely not the kind of book I'd ever read again.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

Genres I'm comfortable with:

Fantasy
Sci-fi
Supernatural thriller
Psychological thriller
Suspense
Adventure
Mystery
Crime
Some classics
Some general fiction
Some historical fiction
Some horror


Genres I'm not comfortable with:

Western
Romance
Erotica (duh!)
Hard science Sci-Fi
'Inspirational' Fiction - blah!

[jacks girl]

I don't like the word comfort zone sounds like I'm afraid to read something other than romance or mystery. It's just that other things don't interest me. They bore me. I'll be asleep 10 min if that long after i pick up anything other than mystery or romance. Right now In my life I'm not reading anything but the Bible and my Joyce Myers book. Now and then I'll listen to an audio but thats about it, I'm not a reader I'd rather write.

The only Non fiction I can ever rembember reading was The Dog Whisperer's life story and some of Chuck Norris life story, at the time I couldn't afford the book or i would have read all of it. I also read some of Dave Ramsey Total money makeover and now I'm ready Battlefield of the mind.

Romance and mystery is my thing when I do read an audio. My comfort zone is my recliner LOL

Jacks

[michaelsnyder]

'Comfort zone' was merely my shortcut (first phrase that came to mind actually) for 'reading what you normally read'. Like some other folks said, I too read a wide variety of styles and voices, too many to narrow it down to just one or two genres. But I think in most cases, there are threads and similarities and themes that form our reading habits.

I've never done this, but I do believe that if I made a list of my top ten favorite books...or perhaps the last ten books I read...or some such other list, I dare say there'd some obvious similarities in style, voice, theme, subject matter, etc. I would guess that that would probably be the case for most of us. But then again, maybe not?

In fact, as I've been typing this, I realized that I prefer contemporary novels with literary leanings. I place a high premium on humor, and care way more about character than plot. I love 'great writing' but have no real clue how to define it...one of those, "I'll know it when I see it" things. Thus, this entire last paragraph would be my 'comfort zone', although I read (and sometimes really enjoy) stuff that's not even close to that description.

Mike

[michaelsnyder]

Merry, funny thing...my editor is really after me to write a zombie story. If/when the time comes, can I pick your brain on zombie lore? (I doubt the time will actually come though!). And thanks again for reading my book.

And William...sorry about apologizing, man!

[David Meigs]

Merry, funny thing...my editor is really after me to write a zombie story... I have zombies in my first book. Let me know if you need the secret recipe. !thumbsup!

[michaelsnyder]

I very well may take you up on the offer, Oh Ranter of Curmudgeonness!

[David Meigs]

Seriously, the recipe works too! I tried it out on my clairvoyant dog after we found him murdered. !thumbsup!

...but you need superglue to keep all the pieces from falling off. :o

[michaelsnyder]

That's hilarious, Curmy...and now I'm going to bed before I need some superglue on myself!

[wgjones3]

Merry, funny thing...my editor is really after me to write a zombie story.

Sounds like you've got the best editor ever!

[Cymrugirl]

Probably the books that I've picked up "to see what it was all about" that lay the most outside my comfort zone are The DaVinci Code and The Harry Potter series. They both had such enormous pop cultural impact that I'm glad I did. I feel like I know the general reading audience better by picking up the things that appeal to them.

I plan to read Pullman's series too - but what I've read so far makes me ill, so I'm not looking forward to it at all. And something tells me his books may fade over time. Like Dan Brown. However, I have strong suspicions that Potter is here to stay.

Reading J.K. Rowling's world-wide phenomenon actually encouraged me. While the context of her story made me feel at times highly uncomfortable - the overall values of the book tell me that humanity is largely unchanged in that it is seeking a savior - that it values love above all - and that it still finds the same things villanous and heroic that it always has. The world loves magic just as much as it did when Jesus was here and healing the sick.

The Harry Potter series offered these values up in a way that I haven't really seen done since The Lord of the Rings or The Chronicles of Narnia. It was time for a new savior - and J.K. Rowling simply got there first.

However, the Potter series has ended and readers are eagerly searching the horizon for their next hero. So, in spite of the publishing world stressing that readers tastes have changed - at the basic level, I think Potter is proof that they haven't.

Now that I know J.K. Rowlings' books intimately, I feel I have an advantage as a writer in at least attempting to fill the void.

Her writing is often average (I frequently wanted to rearrange her sentences) but she captured, of all the existing human archetypes in literature, the most beloved ones in a new way - and that's the key - the hard thing.

[Timber Wolf]

.... and care way more about character than plot.

....



See, now that is somehting I just cannot comprehend. I do not see how the two can be broken apart. But that is why there are so many authors, publishing houses, etc.

[Tarin]

'Comfort zone' was merely my shortcut (first phrase that came to mind actually) for 'reading what you normally read'. Like some other folks said, I too read a wide variety of styles and voices, too many to narrow it down to just one or two genres. But I think in most cases, there are threads and similarities and themes that form our reading habits.

Hmm, interesting thought.


Last 10 books I've read:


Master Humphrey's Clock by Charles Dickens
The Bourne Ultimatum by Robert Ludlum
The Comancheros by Paul I. Wellman
Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman
Sir Nigel by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Certain Women by Madeleine L'Engle
A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens
American Gods by Neil Gaiman
The Friend of the Family by Fyodor Dostoevksy
The Double by Fyodor Dostoevksy


But perhaps it would be more telling to look at the last ten books I liked:


Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman
Certain Women by Madeleine L'Engle
American Gods by Neil Gaiman
Redeeming Love by Francine Rivers
Stardust by Neil Gaiman
The Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club by Charles Dickens
The Bourne Identity by Robert Ludlum
Uncle's Dream by Fyodor Dostoevsky
Inkspell by Cornelia Funke
The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger


Beyond the obvious connection of certain authors who I've been concentrating on of late, I'm seeing a surprising thread of humor. When I sit down to read a book, I don't necessarily hope for a funny read (actually, I'm more likely to hope it will make me cry), but humor always affects how well I end up liking a book. Some books like Uncle's Dream and Inkspell got points simply for their humor, even though the stories themselves weren't fabulous.

I love the literary feel of books like Certain Women and The Time Traveler's Wife and, to some extent, Neil Gaiman's work. The suspense of American Gods and The Bourne Identity were what kept me reading. But, interestingly enough, the only books on the list that I would consider as strong in the character department are The Time Traveler's Wife and American Gods.

Interesting exercise. Thanks for suggesting it! :)

[wowreallylongid]

For me, I think I'd have to say that the shear act of reading is outside my comfort zone. When I was in Junior High School I had to go to a reading tutor because I was years behind my classmates. I was a horrible reader! Slow, forgetful, easily distracted, and hated sitting in one spot for so long. And now I have a degree in literature and edit a literary journal...go figure.

But even now, if I had a choice to go bike riding (or for that matter clean the house) or read...I'd probably choose the more physically engaging activity (yes, even if it's cleaning the house). I think that's why I read a lot of poetry collections (they're short and I can think about them while cleaning or driving or fencing). But I often do force myself to read novels. To make it more of an "activity" my husband and I have started reading to each other. This past week we just finished Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser (I think that's how you spell his name). That was a bit outside the comfort zone. An excellent read, but I love my fast food...and now I feel guilty every time I drive-thru...

[dovespromise]

A Newbie's perspective:

In the past few years, my "comfort zone" has been burying myself in great literature of the past, especially by British authors of the Regency/Victorian/Edwardian eras, and pioneer stories by American authors. I enjoy books, TV and film that transport me to more genteel times or shows "the good ol' days". I sometimes feel I was born in the wrong era!

I think, too, that my spiritual beliefs prevent me from indulging in the wide spectrum of fiction and non-fiction available. When I rededicated my life to the Lord in 1998, I severely restricted reading and viewing choices. This was necessary because God wanted to renew my mind, and as C.S. Lewis once said, "baptize my imagination."
I find that now I can revisit some (not all) of those past works with a godly perspective, and appreciate them with a spiritual sensitivity once dulled.

In addition to dearly loved novels, I try to push myself to choose more challenging classics each year like Dante's Inferno or Chaucer's "Canterbury Tales". Or I will step outside my "Protestant" comfort zone and read works by great Roman Catholic thinkers like G.K. Chesterton or delve into the strange and exciting lives of saints and mystics of the past. Or, maybe choose fiction and non-fiction by someone decidely pagan or atheist, and get their views on life.

I have difficulty picking up work by contemporary authors, unless I watch a film based on one of their books. A recent example is Tracy Chevalier's "Girl with a Pearl Earring". I read it because of my love for Vermeer's work, but liked her writing style so much that I read "The Lady and the Unicorn" and "Fallen Angels." Despite a little crude humor and some sexual content in some of these novels, I thoroughly enjoyed them. Her plot structure was as fascinating as the stories themselves.

Oh, and I agree with Warrior4Jesus. Most Christian fiction is "blah"! There have been many novels I could not finish because I felt my intelligence was insulted.

Good thread!
DovesPromise <><

[ProfessorAlan]

In addition to series and my "book list," I get reading ideas from book reviews, browsing the library shelves, lists of upcoming releases, bestsellers lists, etc .......

I experiment by genres and subject matter regularly, and don't limit my reading to what I think I will like and/or agree with. I sometimes enjoy the stretching.

[Timber Wolf]

....

Oh, and I agree with Warrior4Jesus. Most Christian fiction is "blah"! There have been many novels I could not finish because I felt my intelligence was insulted.

Good thread!
DovesPromise <><

Are you ref to the comment:



....

'Inspirational' Fiction - blah!

I'm glad to see others feel the same. I just don't find "inspirational" fiction very inspirational for the most part, I too feel like I'm being insulted and preached at. I have plenty of good Bible study references that doa better job. If the authors want to "inspire" me then for the most part they need to do a better job at the writing and quit concentrating on preaching.

[Alice]

Yes, I do read outside my 'comfort zone.' As I read more and more books, I find my zone expanding.

I am not a big fan of historical fiction, but I recently discovered Patrick O'Brien's sea novels about Jack Aubrey and Stephen Maturin, and recently discovered as well humorous and well-written regency romances by the famous Georgette Heyer.

Does that mean I will run out and read all the historical fiction I can find? Rather not. If anything, finding good books in a genre makes me feel more picky about what I'll read in that genre. It shows me what good books can do.

There are probably books in almost any genre that I'd like, and I find more and more of them as I read more widely.

That said, there are certain genres I do not actively seek out, such as western and popular fiction. These will have to work a lot harder to grab my attention. And most romance and Christian fiction.

Actually, I tend to have rather exacting standards about even the genres I like a lot...

[tlm]

I've never read a John Grisham novel. Amazing isn't it? I bought The Testament at the library sale Saturday. I thought I might like it since I went on a mission trip to Brazil.

[dovespromise]

I'm glad to see others feel the same. I just don't find "inspirational" fiction very inspirational for the most part, I too feel like I'm being insulted and preached at. I have plenty of good Bible study references that doa better job. If the authors want to "inspire" me then for the most part they need to do a better job at the writing and quit concentrating on preaching.

Exactly, TimberWolf. That's what I meant. Well said. I often don't see complex characters in this genre. Everything is so black and white. Those who write this type of fiction would do better to take their cues from Scripture, where there is beauty and mystery as well as flawed humanity laid open for all to see. Scripture speaks truth without patronizing.

I've given this question some more thought. Here's some things I may read that are out of my "comfort zone."

*Harry Potter series and Pullman's controversial fantasy
*Biographies of spiritual leaders in other religions like Islam or Hinduism
*Books that seek to discredit Jesus or offer perspectives that do not support the Biblical Jesus
*More science books written by atheists or agnostics
*Biographies of musicians esp. from 60's and 70's to learn more about their spiritual lives. Examples would be Bob Marley, Jimi Hendrix, Beatles, etc.
*Read the New Age materials that Oprah is promoting on her show currently

DovesPromise <><

[Tamera]

Exactly, TimberWolf. That's what I meant. Well said. I often don't see complex characters in this genre. Everything is so black and white. Those who write this type of fiction would do better to take their cues from Scripture, where there is beauty and mystery as well as flawed humanity laid open for all to see. Scripture speaks truth without patronizing.

DovesPromise <><

I have been called to write Inspirational Historical Fiction, and I'm afraid, for the most part, I agree with you. Much, but not all, of what I've read, has left me with the feeling that I can't relate to these charaters at all. They're too perfect, and I can't understand why they are so upset by the problems they're having. If that was all that ever went wrong in my life, I'd be relieved, not upset. I am striving to do as Scripture does, create real, complex characters in history that sometimes do horrific things and sometimes have horrific things happen to them. With characters like that, God's redemption shows through in a way we can relate to.

Okay, I'm done hijacking.

[michaelsnyder]

I'm hearing echoed here some of the same things I've heard among writer friends and frankly, what rattled around in my head for a long time...basically that the old guard CBA was too narrowly focused on their core constituency. Meaning? My mom...

Don't get me wrong, I love my mother to pieces. But she is the stereotypical CBA reader who has zero tolerance for anything outside the customary lines of the CBA, be it language, themes, plot lines and what have you. Traditionally, the CBA has been content to promote and market to the proverbial 'choir'.

Thus, I was positive that my story had no chance and was making plans to seek publication in the ABA (or just sit around and amuse myself with my literary-leaning, hair-brained stories).

A DISCLAIMER: None of what follows is intended as self-promotion, but rather as ONE example of what I consider a very encouraging trend. I just have first-hand knowledge of my story. So please receive this with the humility intended (then go buy my stinkin' book anyway!!! Sorry...)

My preferred reading/writing genre is something like this: contemporary post-modern, literary, character-driven, with some blending of humor and pathos. I actually referred to it as Neurotica at CBA writer's conferences. Some people 'got it', most excused themselves and hurried away.

Here's why my story had no shot: a confused slacker protagonist who feeds his basset hound whiskey biscuits, an alcoholic dog who may or may not be clairvoyant, so-called 'potty' words, out-of-wedlock pregnancy, etc. etc. But let me be quick to point out I was not going for shock value or trying to tweak the CBA. I was merely writing the story in my head (and trust me, it's not as zany as it sounds, right William? Merry? Anybody?)

The point is that, not only did my (CBA) agent embrace the story. But we ended up with three contract offers and had the luxury of getting to choose. My story bucked the system and caused a few minor skirmishes inside my publisher's walls. But they have wholly embraced me and the story and all is well in that regard. I've had some negative feedback for sure. But so far, the response on all fronts has been overwhelmingly positive.

And it's not just me. I was just asked to endorse a Christian satire where the main character lies at every turn to dupe Christians into filling his pockets. There is no conversion scene or anything close. It's just a great story, well-told, that takes a hard (but fair) look at the modern church and what can happen when things go along unchecked. I'm seeing more and more stories break through the CBA publishing ranks that are great stories first, told from a Christian worldview, but nothing at all like what was 'expected' from Christian fiction for decades.

Again, I'm not here to trumpet me or my brand of fiction. I'm not pushing for sex scenes and graphic violence and vulgar words. If anything, I'm pushing for truth in fiction, hopefully great fiction. I'm not advocating CBA over ABA or vice versa. My point simply is that original stories and fresh voices are breaking through. Personally, that's where I feel like the disconnect and frustration comes from. There has been a fear of offending the core audience for so long, that I think we've all been conditioned to think all CBA is created equal. I'm just passing along the positive trends I've been seeing.

I love that folks are successfully writing and selling stuff I don't typically read--historicals, romantic suspense, sci-fi/fantasy, westerns, cozy mysteries, etc. etc. By no means do I want to see less of those. I sincerely hope they keep writing them, selling them, and making people happy. Just glad to see scope broadening.

Man, I talk too much. Sorry about that. But take heart anyway if you've been discouraged about stuff. There really is more room at the table these days.

Mike

[michaelsnyder]

A quick follow up to that diatribe...

So far, most (but not all) of the old guard readers are enjoying my story...meaning they're not offended by the dysfunctional characters, the taboo words, the modern humor, or the post-modern ideas that emerge. Again, that's not about me...the point is that maybe the CBA has not given its readership enough credit to engage with more modern storytelling. Of course, it remains to be seen if these 'new' stories will actually sell well enough to keep the trend going. We'll see...

[Tamera]

That sounds like an encouraging trend. Maybe there's hope for my historical (non romance) that doesn't take place on the prarie and centers around outlaws.

[righter1]

I appreciate your diatribe, Michael!

Although I'm writing for the ABA market over the CBA (never really read much of the CBA anyway, as indicated in previous entries), it's nice to know that you can buck trends in the CBA. Maybe I could market my story there...

BTW, you need to have a signature line with a link to your website (if you have one) so those of us not familiar with your work can check it out!

[michaelsnyder]

Great idea, Righter 1...I'm on my way to a meeting (day job!!!) and will figure out the signature thing later.

In the meantime, my meager blog is: http://snyderman.blogspot.com/

My website goes live sometime this month. And if nothing else, it will look good!

As to the trends, I forgot to mention that I know 2 editors personally who are planning to push vampire stories in the CBA. It doesn't get much more outside-the-lines than that.

[Tarin]

Again, I'm not here to trumpet me or my brand of fiction. I'm not pushing for sex scenes and graphic violence and vulgar words. If anything, I'm pushing for truth in fiction, hopefully great fiction. I'm not advocating CBA over ABA or vice versa. My point simply is that original stories and fresh voices are breaking through. Personally, that's where I feel like the disconnect and frustration comes from. There has been a fear of offending the core audience for so long, that I think we've all been conditioned to think all CBA is created equal. I'm just passing along the positive trends I've been seeing.

Well said.!thumbsup!

[wgjones3]

Here's why my story had no shot: a confused slacker protagonist who feeds his basset hound whiskey biscuits, an alcoholic dog who may or may not be clairvoyant, so-called 'potty' words, out-of-wedlock pregnancy, etc. etc. But let me be quick to point out I was not going for shock value or trying to tweak the CBA. I was merely writing the story in my head (and trust me, it's not as zany as it sounds, right William? Merry? Anybody?)

Sorry, Mike. It's definitely zany, but in a good way. And oddly, the weirder it gets, the more sense the story makes. It's a great book, you know I love it.

A quick follow up to that diatribe...

So far, most (but not all) of the old guard readers are enjoying my story...meaning they're not offended by the dysfunctional characters, the taboo words, the modern humor, or the post-modern ideas that emerge. Again, that's not about me...the point is that maybe the CBA has not given its readership enough credit to engage with more modern storytelling. Of course, it remains to be seen if these 'new' stories will actually sell well enough to keep the trend going. We'll see...

I'm really glad to hear that, Mike.

[KO'Leary]

Though I have certain types of literature I'm drawn to, especially Christian fiction, I try to read outside my interest area too. I agree, it offers one a chance to grow as a writer. Happy reading and writing everyone!

Karen

[Tommie Lyn]

I've given this question some more thought. Here's some things I may read that are out of my "comfort zone."

*Harry Potter series and Pullman's controversial fantasy
*Biographies of spiritual leaders in other religions like Islam or Hinduism
*Books that seek to discredit Jesus or offer perspectives that do not support the Biblical Jesus
*More science books written by atheists or agnostics
*Biographies of musicians esp. from 60's and 70's to learn more about their spiritual lives. Examples would be Bob Marley, Jimi Hendrix, Beatles, etc.
*Read the New Age materials that Oprah is promoting on her show currently

DovesPromise <><
I'm careful about what I read. I wouldn't willfully put poison in my body, and I don't want to put poison ideas in my mind. What we read can definitely have an effect on us, can influence us -- and not in a good way, sometimes.

[Merry]

Here's why my story had no shot: a confused slacker protagonist who feeds his basset hound whiskey biscuits, an alcoholic dog who may or may not be clairvoyant, so-called 'potty' words, out-of-wedlock pregnancy, etc. etc. But let me be quick to point out I was not going for shock value or trying to tweak the CBA. I was merely writing the story in my head (and trust me, it's not as zany as it sounds, right William? Merry? Anybody?)


Mike

Naw, it's zany...and as far as the dog goes, I'm calling PETA. But I am SOOOO glad it sold. Seriously, if you could sell that thing...:D

But, all kidding aside, it's great to see your work making it. (I mean, jeesh...my Victorian great grandmother would find CBA fiction quite safe and she's been dead for eighty years. ) So GOOD to see people I can recognize in a Christian novel...man I can't even tell you! I salute this new genre of neurotica and pray it continues to build a following!

[michaelsnyder]

Thanks William and Merry...not just for saying nice stuff about my book, but for reading it in the first place!

You guys rock!

And yeah, it really is exciting to see the CBA offerings expanding. I have a bunch of writer friends getting published, genres that really don't excite me personally. But I'm THRILLED beyond measure not only for the writers, but for their eventual readers too. It's good for everybody.

[michaelsnyder]

Hah...didn't dawn on me till after I hit 'send' that I addressed to CW'ers as if they were a (misspelled) university in Virginia!

[Merry]

Willaim and Merry...Lol! When I read that I thought the same thing. Yes, we're the 'other school' out there!

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

An alcoholic dog who may be a clairvoyant? Wow. Sounds very cool!

Tommie, obviously you should know what makes you stumble and what doesn't and go from there.
Personally I found the His Dark Material books to be far more harmful than Harry Potter was ever believed to be, but neither should be read by young children.

[Tommie Lyn]

Personally I found the His Dark Material books to be far more harmful than Harry Potter was ever believed to be, but neither should be read by young children.
I don't really have a problem with Harry Potter. I quoted that part of the post and that included Harry Potter. But the ones that concerned me, the books that I consider poison, are those attempting to proselytize readers to New Ageism and other -isms.

And while I don't think reading one book like those could necessarily cause me to stumble per se, I do know this: whatever you read, whatever you put into your mind, those words will have an influence of some kind on you. You may not realize that it's happening, but, in some way, they will have an effect on your thinking. You won't be the same as you were before you read them.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

Very true. It's crucial to be discerning in what we read/do.

[Timber Wolf]

....

I do know this: whatever you read, whatever you put into your mind, those words will have an influence of some kind on you. You may not realize that it's happening, but, in some way, they will have an effect on your thinking. You won't be the same as you were before you read them.

Definitely agree.

[Cymrugirl]

I used to believe this firmly as well - and still do to a degree, but over the last few years especially, I've come to believe that the church has adopted some new ageism of its own. I've never found a Biblical basis for the idea that we are permanently altered by everything we're exposed to in the English language.

Chrisitianity is not based on works or exposure to works. It defines itself autonomously from all other faiths whose running theme seems to be mind over matter.

As a person who feels impressed by the Holy Spirit to write - I feel that my field is the world of writing and I must be familiar with that field in order to stand better in it. The same way Paul familiarized himself with the philosophers of his day. It is not unlike a missionary called to a country whose religion and customs are foreign to his own, studying that country before he goes into it, that he might speak more directly to its need. It can be an ugly task, but prove crucial to that command to be all things to all people.

[Tommie Lyn]

over the last few years especially, I've come to believe that the church has adopted some new ageism of its own.

Exactly my point. How did that New Ageism creep in? Because Christians exposed themselves to the tenets and ideas of New Ageism...

Chrisitianity is not based on works or exposure to works.
Yes, it is. As people are exposed to the Word of God, their hearts and minds can be captured for Christ.

[Cymrugirl]

Exactly my point. How did that New Ageism creep in? Because Christians exposed themselves to the tenets and ideas of New Ageism...

Not necessarily. I believe New Ageism has found its way into the church because Christian congregants have been taught by ministers who subscribe to new age doctrines of mental power - and even then, subscription to that teaching has only come because those same congregants have not educated themselves in the Word of God to know better.

The idea that Christianity is a mental state that must be protected from negative - or wrong - thoughts or else it is overthrown, is very much a new age idea. Christianity is not a mental state - the Word tells us that our salvation occurs even though our mind has not yet been transformed. Salvation is a separate event from mental transformation. However, modern ministers seem to equate mental transformation with different values of Christian relationship with God. Certain Christians walk "closer" to God than other Christians based on these values.

That kind of teaching sounds very much like scientology to me or Christian science - rather than Biblically based.

The Word does command us to consider what is lovely, what is righteous, what is pure - it tells us to be cautious about philosophy and modern ideas - but it also filled with the letters of men, such as Paul, who had become well acquainted with those ideas enough to accurately and soundly address them.

I just think the idea of protecting ourselves - and our own Christian status - has become more important in Christian America than laying self down and washing the feet of those around us. To do so, we must acquaint ourselves with smelly feet - we must acquaint ourselves with the ground that those feet have walked on.


Yes, it is. As people are exposed to the Word of God, their hearts and minds can be captured for Christ.

Exposure to the Word of God is not the same as works based faith. Faith without works is dead, yes, but James' words nearly escaped being canonized because Paul had so strongly stressed that what we do is not the basis for our salvation.

In the end, however, it was decided that James brought balance rather than contradiction to the relationship between faith and works.

While doing certain things cannot secure or destroy our salvation or create our faith - faith does produce certain actions. In knowing that, I would think a person of strong faith would fear its destruction less rather than more when keeping company with those who would otherwise doubt that faith.

Did Paul study Plato because his faith was weak? I think not. He studied Plato because his faith was strong and knew that Plato was no match for the secure faith which lay inside his heart.



And after diatribing all that - I have to note that after reading the rest of this thread, I'm realizing that pretty much the only genre I'm not well acquainted with is the western. Love the films. Never touch the books. Why is this? I think it has something to do with Shane and high school.

[Tarin]

Good discussion, Cyrmu and Tommie. :)

[dovespromise]

TommieLyn wrote:
I'm careful about what I read. I wouldn't willfully put poison in my body, and I don't want to put poison ideas in my mind. What we read can definitely have an effect on us, can influence us -- and not in a good way, sometimes.

I think this is wise advice. Everything we watch and view needs to discerned Biblically.
We need to listen to the Holy Spirit, and learn to obey when He says "no" to a reading or viewing choice. Sometimes He will restrain us for a season, until we are mature enough to handle the material. Some things remain forbidden. Everything we do requires sensitivity to the Lord's leading.

I mentioned many things on my list that are outside of my belief system. At times, even as a young Christian, I was exposed to different beliefs in a college course on Religion and Ethics. We read sacred texts from Hinduism, biographies of Wiccans and other spiritual seekers, and papers by gay and feminist theologians. These things were definitely outside my "comfort zone", but God used them to strengthen my faith in Him. I clung to the truth despite the false teachings I had to study. This required critical thinking skills and a lot of prayer, even to cleanse and safeguard my mind.

The most challenging leap I've made outside my "comfort zone" is reading about Christianity from different denominations. It's easy to see the vast difference between Christianity and Islam, for example. But studying the Calvinist view of salvation vs. Arminianism, or dispensational theology vs. covenant theology proved much more difficult!

Blessings,
DovesPromise <><

[ProfessorAlan]

I think we all draw lines (it's human nature), of maybe we each draw a big circle around ourselves, where those ideas and churches and people and teachers and doctrines inside the circle are "good/acceptable" and those outside the circle are "bad/unacceptable."

Personally, I draw a pretty big circle -- and even read outside that big circle sometimes.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

Oh noes! U eval prof. lol

No, I do the same.