Interacting With Culture
A couple years ago, I wrote a post about escapism, taking as the jumping off point, J. R. R. Tolkien’s line: “[critics] are confusing, not always by sincere error, the Escape of the Prisoner with the Flight of the Deserter.”
A little further on in the “On Fairy-Stories” essay, he said, “Not only do they confound the escape of the prisoner with the flight of the deserter; but they would seem to prefer the acquiescence of the ‘quisling’ to the resistance of the patriot.”
Are those our only two choices — giving in to our culture as traitors or fighting against it as a lover of what is right and true?
Is there no intersection in which we who know the truth can show it to our society rather than running from the assault or turning to fight? In other words, can’t we win the enemy rather than destroy him? Or perhaps, can’t we make the case that we’re in this together, that there are no “sides”?
The more I think about “escape,” the more I rebel at the idea.
If we were physically starving, I suspect we wouldn’t have such a great need to wile away time on light, fun entertainment that takes us away from our troubles. The only way to stave off hunger is to go about acquiring food.
Perhaps we think spiritual food is different, but I don’t think so. Our souls which are eternal need to be fed as much as do our bodies.
Perhaps we Christians believe ourselves to be well-fed spiritually. But what about all those starving children in China? Seriously. Don’t we have a responsibility to do something for those who are starving spiritually?
Some may think those who are starving don’t actually want what we have to offer. Ask atheists if they want what we who write Christian speculative fiction have to offer, and they will probably respond with a blank stare. Or worse.
They don’t know they’re starving. They don’t realize that they’ve been eating dirt to fill their stomachs so they won’t ache so much, but there is nothing of lasting value in what they’ve been ingesting that can keep them alive.
Don’t misunderstand. I’m not suggesting that the critics Tolkien was addressing were right in their assessment of “fairy stories.” Rather, I think what speculative fiction does is far greater than escape.
One comment to the post I mentioned earlier sheds light on this idea:
Calling fantasy the “flight of the deserter” does miss fantasy’s close connection with reality. But I think that calling fantasy the “escape of the prisoner” misses that connection just as much. The dichotomy seems to assume that the realm of fantasy has to be divorced from reality — whereas I think that the goal of Christian fantasy should be to unite them. Tolkien’s short stories, particularly Leaf by Niggle and Smith of Wootton Major, exhibit an idea that fantasy that is not escape, but a plunge into a deeper reality. Smith (of Wootton Major) makes many visits to Faerie, but those visits serve to enhance the enchantment of the real world when he returns. The existence of Faerie in Tolkien’s writings (including LotR) does not devalue reality but glorifies it. That glorification, I think, is the mark of good Christian fantasy: the writer sees the wonder and goodness (the “enchantment”) already existent in reality; but he also sees that there is more enchantment, more reality, to be had. (comment by Tim, In Search of the Perilous Realm – emphasis mine)
I like the idea that the writer sees the wonder and goodness existent in reality, not just the raw, gritty misery. Isn’t it part of our job to show the rest of the world what we see? That there is a better way than wallowing in the gutter, than eating dirt?
I also like the idea that the writer of good Christian fantasy sees there’s more reality to be had, which allows him to point forward to that which brings ultimate soul fulfillment.
Honestly, I’m having a harder and harder time trying to grasp why it is Christians want to escape. What do we have to escape from? We have Christ. We have His Holy Spirit. We have God’s Word. We have the hope of heaven.
I can see being tired and wanting to rest. However, I’m not successfully getting my thoughts around the idea of escape. Seems to me we should be the firefighters running toward the inferno, not away. We should be about pulling others to safety, about adding to the number who are heading to high ground.
In short, I think Christian speculative writers are best positioned to engage the culture. Engage it, not confront it.
What do you think? How is Christian speculative fiction engaging the culture? Must Christian writers leave Christian publishers and Christian bookstores in order to meet our culture where it’s at?
I don’t think Tolkien was suggesting that our only two options are a heroic escape or a cowardly desertion. I think he was just saying that critics often confuse one for the other. Not every flight fits into the category of one of the two options.
Additionally, I don’t think that every instance of a Christian engaging secular culture can be compared to a fight or battle. Many times, the world is facing in Christ’s direction, but having trouble finding their way around the obstacles. Those are the unbelievers we don’t engage in battle-dress, but in the uniform of a scout or guide.
Jeremy, I’m not sure how else to read what he wrote. The point is, however, he was speaking distinctly to critics of fairy tales who said people had no business escaping into a fantasy realm. Tolkien’s argument was that this world they called “real” was actually a prison, confining readers, keeping them from living life and engaging reality. To flee into fantasy, then, was to flee into truth, not into escapist nonsense.
My question is, ought we not be interested in bringing others along with us into truth? I think C. S. Lewis did. I don’t think an allegory like Pilgrim’s Progress would do that any longer, though it undoubtedly once did. Instead, a story with such clear Christian overtones gets labeled “for Christians.” I think that’s a sad state of affairs, but that’s where our culture is at.
Consequently, I think we need to engage the culture, to bring others along to the truth we know — in a different way, perhaps a more Lewis way — instead of finding a place that suits us just fine whether others encounter truth or not.
Just wondering. 😉
Becky
I’m not sure how else to read what he wrote.
I wish I knew how to fix that for you. Tolkien wasn’t setting up a dichotomy. He was pointing out that critics were confusing the meaning traitors and heroes. To make an analogy, Tolkien was saying “They’re confusing the color red for the color green.” That doesn’t mean those are the only two colors to choose from.
I don’t think an allegory like Pilgrim’s Progress would do that any longer, though it undoubtedly once did.
Perhaps not in the original format, but the storyline has been made into a speculative fiction movie called The Wylds, which does an excellent job of getting across Bunyan’s point (with rocket-wielding robots to boot).
I think there are all sorts of ways to impact people for the gospel. The bible talks of those who plow, those who plant the seed, those who water it, and those who harvest. I think there’s room for us to say that Christians can do all three. There are those who plow the unbeliever’s mind, readying him for something other perhaps without ever mentioning Jesus. Then there are those who name the name of Jesus in an introductory way, without ever leaning in with a convicting word. There is a place for those who water–who sustain an attitude of reverence for God. There is a place for a harvester, who bridges the gap between recognizing a need for Christ and showing the way to him. Not all novels (or even all Christian authors) need to take an unbeliever out of his world, change his paradigm, convict him, and save him in 90,000 words.
Maybe it would help if Christians made the definition more explicit about to what and where good fantastic stories should help readers “escape.” Too long, perhaps, we’ve spoken about escaping into wonder, etc., a lot of high-sounding verbiage that understandably “escapes” (ha ha!) the practical person’s grasp.
But what Tolkien, and non-Christian writers, present in their stories as an Unknown Desire for something, Scripture and the Gospel makes plain to us.
It makes this plain: that in our hearts, all people should desire God and His Place, but substitute those longings with sin’s filth, and that ultimately this world — as it is now — is not our home; the New Earth, remodeled and cleansed of sin, will be Home for all those who love the Creator.
So what should we “escape” from? Not from this world and its artificial constructs to some kind of unknown Ideal. Instead, to imagining the New Heavens and New Earth, where the fantastic will be contemporary, for everlasting time.
Great stuff, Jeremy, and very encouraging. Just the other day I was exploring this, in another nonfiction project, trying to tie this in with the Biblical view of vocation. The fact is, no Christian can specifically present the Gospel at all times; every Christian, even the soapbox street-preacher, spends time glorifying God and echoing the Gospel in other, more subtle ways.
Replying to your reply, Jeremy, which doesn’t seem to allow a reply. 😛
If you’ll recall, that was one of my original questions in the article (“Are those our only two choices — giving in to our culture as traitors or fighting against it as a lover of what is right and true?)
I agree, and was hoping to generate some discussion about how writers, specifically fiction writers, can impact our culture for the gospel.
If you thought I was saying this, then obviously I wasn’t clear. I understand what you said about the various ways in which a writer can engage people for Christ — soil prep, sowing, watering, harvesting. I’ve written articles here at Spec Faith and at my own site that have covered this topic to a degree, stating, for example
I guess I was hoping this article would bring this subject to the forefront again. I think it’s important for Christian writers to think about what it is we’re trying to do and why we’re trying to do it.
Becky
Doesn’t Tolkien go on to say that the escape actually provides an escape back into reality? It was either him or Lewis. Either way, neither of them used “escape” in the same way we think of “escapism.” Rather, I think it meant a breaking free from the enchantment of materialism and the ills of our culture, not an escape or flight from all of reality in that unhealthy way we tend to associate with the term.
Adam, that’s how I understand him, too. But I think there’s a danger of us escaping, even in this way. It’s a selfishness — that it’s important for me to free myself from the ills of our culture without concern for the fact that I end up leaving others wallowing in that culture.
I’m trying to explore the Christian writer’s responsibility to our culture.
Becky
Seeing things as they are meant to be seen–Recovery! And Lewis mentioned that one does not despise ordinary forests, because one knows some are enchanted, and that makes them all a bit enchanted. Same goes for wardrobes and police telephone boxes.
What exactly does “engaging the culture” mean? No one has ever explained that adequately. What culture? Mainstream culture isn’t some homogenous stream you can just connect your little estuary to. It’s made of groups, who don’t share the
What would the choice in the middle be?
Besides, who better to lead people out, under the barbed wire and out of the enclosure, through the woods to freedom then those who have gotten out? The escape is a roadmap in a thousand pieces leading the way out.
Why do Christians need to escape? Why do any of us need to escape? From boredom, from routine, from disappointments and hardship in our lives. We can run off to a fairyland and have adventures and forget our lives for a little while. And if visiting that fairyland makes us appreciate our real lives a little more, then the trip was worth it.
I think if Christians just work on telling a good story, and not trying to convert every last reader, our Christianity will bleed through anyway. I’m always sniffing out ‘stealth Christian’ authors, who aren’t writing overtly Christian books, but their faith comes through anyway. It’s always encouraging and fun.
As opposed to a Christian writing a disgusting, sexual-tension story with a heavy dollop of God at the end, hoping to appeal to secular readers. C’mon, people. Feeding the flesh much?
Kessie, I agree with what you say about Christian writers who try to appeal to secular readers on the basis of secular passions. It really strikes me as the wrong approach. It’s like the people who say if Jesus were here today, we’d find him hanging out in the gay bars. Well, no. I suspect Jesus would do what he did in the first century — start in the house of worship and then take to the streets and the open areas where He could accommodate the crowds.
He’s the example we should use for engaging culture, I think.
And Julius, I think your question is a good one — what exactly is “engaging the culture”? No “the culture” is not homogeneous, but there are definite threads that characterize America today that stand in contrast with America fifty years ago, that stand in contrast with eastern culture.
We are a celebrity culture, for example, as witnessed by American Idol, Celebrity Apprentice, Dancing with the Stars, and any professional sport you want to name (college sports too, more and more). So what does that mean for the Christian? Are we to run from that? Hide our heads because we think that counterfeit fame is harmful?
What about feminism? We’re a culture that has embraced the “rights” of women. Are we as Christians to ignore this? Also embrace it without examining it in light of Scripture, or run away into our stories where we don’t have to deal with such a troubling issue?
I hope that helps.
In light of that explanation, Kessie, I’d have to disagree with your statement that if Christians just work on telling a good story, and not trying to convert every last reader, our Christianity will bleed through anyway. In contrast, I tend to think our culture will bleed through into our Christianity because we spend a lot more time interacting with our culture than we do with our Christianity.
My thinking is that we need to bring our Christianity to bear on what we deal with out there in our culture. And in the same way, we need to bring our culture into our stories and put those mores up against our Christianity — overt or subtle, however we wish to include it.
Becky
I’m not so sure that’s true. Jesus preached in the Jewish synagogue, yes, but it wasn’t exactly a paragon of holiness in the first-century. He and his disciples also hung out and dined with tax-collectors and prostitutes, and he did it with enough regularity to be called their king. He allowed whores to wash his feet. Paul preached in pagan temples, argued with secular philosophers, went before kings and princes to preach in their own court, and said that he would be all things to all men.
I’m not saying that we should limit ourselves to the gutters, whorehouses, gay bars, and adult film stores. But we shouldn’t limit ourselves to churches and Christian fellowships, either. The point isn’t to figure out where we can’t name the name of Jesus, but to realize that the name of Jesus may be named anywhere by a person who is called to do so.
Jeremy, the point isn’t whether or not the Jewish synagogue was a paradigm of virtue or not. Jesus wasn’t coming to heal the well, but the sick, and that took Him to the synagogue. That’s the place where people should have recognized Him and embraced Him.
I suspect a lot of people who suggest Jesus was hanging out with prostitutes and … whatever else they think — in today’s parlance it would be corporate shysters, I suppose, though you rarely hear people say Jesus would be off hanging out with bankers and lobbyists — are missing a key point: the prostitutes and sinners were those who repented. They weren’t hanging out with Jesus on the Sabbath and then hitting the streets the next night looking to turn a trick.
Their lives were changed. And if they weren’t, well, Jesus told his disciples on their short term mission trip to shake the dust off their feet and move on.
Mostly we have Jesus’s success stories, but there were places where Jesus found closed doors, and He moved on. That fact reiterates the idea that the harlots and tax collectors and other publicans and sinners were not still what they had been.
No matter that Rahab was an ancester of King David and in Christ’s genealogy, she is still known as “Rahab the harlot” (see James 2:25), but I doubt very much that she was a practicing prostitute after Jericho fell to the Hebrews.
The point is, it’s an error for us to keep repeating this idea that Jesus would choose to hang with those who hate Him and who rebel against God’s Word. We should stop saying it because Scripture doesn’t bear this out as true.
Colossians 1:21-23 a puts this into perspective, I think: And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach—if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel . . .
If you think this is what I was saying, Jeremy, then I definitely failed to communicate my point. I guess I’ll have to try harder next time.
Becky