1. Travis Perry says:

    I want to be sure to point out first I’m mostly in agreement with you. Points 1-4 and 7 are solid in my mind.

    However, I’m not so sure about 6 and 7. The DC and Marvel turf war certainly hasn’t hurt comic book sales, has it? I mean, a self-identified Christian community feuding is probably not advisable because I don’t think that’s what Christ would want from us. But it isn’t necessarily true that splitting into camps will dampen growth. It doesn’t work that way for comic books.

    Likewise with point 6. Being loyal to what you like, say the “crossover” approach, does not necessarily hurt the growth of other flavors of speculative fiction we can call “Christian.” While I would say it isn’t advisable to “diss” works that aren’t a person’s personal thing, it isn’t necessarily bad if we have divided camps with strong loyalties within them. As long as we can disagree in a civil manner…

    So, again, great points, even though I don’t entirely agree on 5 and 6.

    • I would view “crossover” vs. “Christian” publishing “camps” as similar to denominations. It’s not wrong, and in fact can be very helpful, to group together based on those shared secondary interests. The only problem is when people let this natural bent or grouo-loyalty turn into a motive to condemn folks in other camps. We need to be all in this together, even while we are called to specific areas of influence!

  2. Darrick Dean says:

    When I look at #6, it is a shame that some people are “either-or” on this issue. I realize all readers have their preference as far as what they want their “Christian fiction” to be, but that is what it is, a preference. The other side should not be discounted. Unfortunately, some have gone as far and created litmus tests of what Christian art (books, film, music) must include to be considered Christian. A litmus test I recently saw discussed would most likely exclude some very popular Christian writers. One positive is that I think most Christian authors writing speculative fiction are not trying to write for one demographic or another. They are just trying to write their stories, and that is what all authors should do.

  3. Roger Spendlove says:

    I find your use of what I’ll call “Reverse Logic” confusing and hard to follow.
    I get that you’re trying to write this article in the vein of “The Screwtape Letters” or some such. But coming at your topics from the backwards/mirror is hard to follow. I have to turn every sentence 180 degrees around just to decypher your meaning, and I’m afraid most of it is getting lost in the translation.
    Could you re-write this article from the perspective of saying what you actually mean (instead of saying the opposite of what you mean), and repost it tomorrow, or soon?

What do you think?