When Enclave Publishing (formerly Marcher Lord Press) announced its Kickstarter campaign to help fund and promote their fall 2014 lineup of books, Speculative Faith’s own E. Stephen Burnett posted about his support of the endeavor on his Facebook page.

And the thread caught fire. I’m writing today to clear up some misconceptions about what’s really going on, here.

Splickety Magzine editor and owner Ben Wolf

Let me preface this by saying that I’ve had multiple conversations with both Steve Laube (owner of Enclave) and Thomas Umstaddt, Jr. (his web designer/marketing consultant on the Kickstarter campaign), about Enclave, marketing, and Kickstarter in general.

I’m not an employee of Enclave, nor do I work for Thomas. I’m the Executive Editor/Founder of Splickety Publishing Group, a freelance editor, and author. We don’t compete with Enclave because we publish magazines.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I have paid money to see both Thomas and Steve teach at conferences, and I have personally backed (at least) two of Thomas’s Kickstarter campaigns, both of which delivered the promised content for what the level of support I committed. I also intend to back the Enclave Kickstarter based on the reasons I’m going to detail below.

I say this to establish that I’m both more or less objective (I really admire and like both Steve and Thomas, and I’ve learned a ton from both of them) but also more attuned to what they’re trying to accomplish because of conversations we’ve had and based on past kickstarter campaigns and marketing endeavors.

I’m also well-acquainted with Jeff Gerke, the founder and former owner of Marcher Lord Press (MLP). He and I have also discussed the shift of MLP’s ownership from himself to Steve, and he has had nothing but praise for Steve and encouragement for readers, authors, and followers to continue to support MLP/Enclave under Steve’s management.

Without further delay, here are five reasons why we should support the Enclave Kickstarter.

1. Kickstarter is a legitimate crowdfunding site.

People/businesses use Kickstarter these days. It’s part of this new technological age we live in, and it’s silly to chastise Steve Laube, the owner of Enclave, for using a tool that is available to him.

Ever heard of venture capitalists or angel investors? Ever been given a loan or a gift from a friend, relative, or even a perfect stranger that you then used to accomplish something?

That’s what this is. It’s startup cash. It’s coming to Enclave in a different form, yes, but essentially it’s no different. In fact, it has additional benefits that don’t come with angel investors or venture capitalists.

2. They will deliver on their promises.

Some people have criticized them for using Kickstarter itself because of allegations of misuse or even fraud and scams that other users have run through Kickstarter, which is a legitimate concern.

But that’s not Kickstarter’s fault. That’s the fault of the folks who abused a great tool and cast Kickstarter in a negative light. Criticizing a company for using a tool that is available to them to expand their business is ridiculous, especially when that company (or the person or persons behind it) are known for their integrity.

Thomas UmStaddt, Jr. ran two Kickstarter campaigns in the last few years that I supported. Guess what happened? He delivered exactly what he said he would, and he delivered it earlier than he said he would.

Steve Laube is widely respected for his integrity and stellar career within the CBA. According to Amanda Luedeke, an agent from MacGregor Literary, Steve “would never do this to pocket money or improve his bottom line.”

As a further testament to his integrity, let me tell you a story that involves Steve and Havok, Splickety’s spec fic imprint:

Jeff Gerke committed ebook versions of all 40-ish of the books he’d published through MLP as a prize for Havok’s first ever contest in our July issue of this year. Then he went and sold the company to Steve.

I contacted Steve to follow up with him about the prize, and while he said he thought the prize was quite steep, he agreed to honor Jeff’s commitment. After the contest, he awarded the prize to our winning author. He didn’t argue or try to renegotiate—he just fulfilled the obligation, even though someone else had obligated him to do it.

Suffice it to say, I think you can trust these guys.

3. MLP may be five years old, but Enclave is just a baby.

Let’s be realistic, here. Enclave is, for all intents and purposes, a new business. When Jeff Gerke left MLP in Steve’s hands, there was one publishable manuscript available and a very different process and infrastructure. The rest had to be restarted from scratch.

Now, within six months (or so) of the purchase announcement date, there are five. That takes some serious spending (covers alone can range from $300 to $800 or more for great-quality work, plus Steve is paying top level editors their market wage while Jeff did the editing himself) and this Kickstarter is only trying to raise $2500. That’s easily 1/4 or smaller of the investment Steve is making in the launch of these new books.

Do you really think Steve needs an extra $2500 to make these books go? Come on. He’s just asking us to be good capitalists and to vote with our wallets. If you don’t want to vote, then don’t.

$2500 is a pittance, and the money itself is likely not the reason they’re doing it this way. In fact…

4. Kickstarter is as much a marketing effort as it is a fundraising effort.

By stirring up controversy we’ve just drawn more attention to the supposed trickery and evil of Enclave, and as such, now more people know their name. Mission accomplished.

As Kickstarter says on its own website: “A Kickstarter project does more than raise money. 
It builds community around your work.” Again, mission accomplished, especially since they’ve already surpassed their $2500 goal.

What’s more, it’s a convenient, fun way to preorder Enclave’s books. They have plenty of options (prices and rewards in exchange for various levels of commitments) for you to choose from should you decide to invest. That’s really what this is: a streamlined way to preorder books (at nice discounts, might I add).

Amanda Luedeke added that, “this is a way for him to take pre-orders without having to [go through] Amazon.” Apparently, it’s harder for small houses to get the perks that larger houses get from Amazon, and preorders are a part of that. This way Steve can offer his readers discounts without being at Amazon’s mercy.

5. Steve is one of us.

Steve Laube is a speculative fiction aficionado and he’s easily the nerdiest (in a positive, cerebral way) lit agent I’ve ever met. I swear to you—I was actually surprised at how big into spec fic he was. I had no idea. He’s an avid spec fic reader, and he knows and loves the genre better than most (if not all) of us do, Christian or otherwise.

He’s every bit as dedicated to making Enclave (and Christian speculative fiction on the whole) succeed in our marketplace as Jeff is/was, and he wants all of us to be a part of that.

Steve and Enclave are NOT evil or bad or stupid. Steve is going to take Christian spec fic to the next level, and we should help and support to do it. So, if you’ve got a grievance, air it out in the comments section, and let’s get to the root(s) of the issue(s) and find a way to move forward.

Outstanding among those beliefs that are universally characteristic of the religion of superstition is the conviction that “a man’s name is the essence of his being” (one Hebrew text says “a man’s name is his person” and another, “his name is his soul”). Joshua Trachtenberg, Jewish Magic and Superstition

There’s an old superstition that names are powerful. Many cultures have believed that to know a person’s name is to have power over him, or to be freed from his power. The principle has been extended to the supernatural, with people seeking to conjure up the power of gods, angels, and demons by invoking their names.

Like all superstitions, this one shows both fear and a desire to control. Magic, real magic, has made great use of it; sorcerers, too, believed in the power of names. From the eleventh century come reports of witnesses – “learned and trustworthy men” – who claimed “that they had themselves seen magicians write names upon reeds and olive-leaves, which they cast before robbers and thus prevented their passage, or, having written such names upon new sherds, threw them into a raging sea and mollified it, or threw them before a man to bring about his sudden death.”

This idea has endured in folk tales – most famously in Rumpelstiltskin – and is now an established trope in modern fantasy and even, on occasion, sci-fi. Despite its various disreputable associations, it has a presence in Christian fantasy.

So how is a superstition transformed into a staple of fiction? It begins when people stop believing. If you genuinely believe in the mystic power of names, you will take it seriously – hiding your real name like people hide their PIN number, or worrying that you’ll curse your child by giving him an unlucky name. When you stop believing, the fun begins. What in our world would be bad science, or mere superstition, is the operating laws of different worlds. Everyone who reads speculative fiction knows this.

In Andrew Peterson’s Wingfeather Saga, names and their power are at the heart of the story. The villains transform human beings into monsters by melding them with other creatures and then giving them new names. Their old selves are submerged and they become willing pawns for the villains. But unless and until the new name is given, the transformation remains incomplete. The victim’s old self is much closer to the surface and it’s easier for him to come back.

For these people, to hear their true names is painful. But it is also, if they don’t rebel, healing – and not for any magical, other-world reason. Their true names hurt and heal because the hearing reminds them who they were and what they lost; it brings them back to themselves.

The power-of-names theme is echoed throughout the saga. A lesser villain calls his enslaved workers ‘tools’ and tells them they have no names; the revolution begins when the workers start to share their names and band together. “What is a real name?” asks one character early on, hinting at hidden names and the truths hidden with them. And through it all the admonition and reminder comes again and again, Remember who you are.

Names, a character within the books says, have power. But it would be more true, even in his own world, to say that names have meaning. A person’s name is representative of his self, and to forget your name is to forget who you are. Unlike the old folk tales, there is no danger in telling others your true name, only in forgetting it yourself; there’s no power in knowing the names of others, only in making them forget their names.

Such subtle alteration is another way to revive and change old myths into new stories. Most legends and fairy tales, along with the fairy tale-worthy superstitions, are open for this sort of reconstruction, pagan origins or no. Have you ever been struck by a story’s transformation of a myth or superstition? Is there a myth or superstition you think ripe for such transformation?

[Note: This post was written for the CSFF Blog Tour of The Warden and the Wolf King, running this week, and is cross-posted to my blog. For full links to the blog tour, visit Rebecca Miller’s site.]

What is your definition of “edgy Christian fiction”?

For many it is a story that contains sex and/or cussing. While violence is generally accepted, graphic gore would be considered edgy. Horror is also edgy, especially if it contains the aforementioned gore. Another common edgy element is magic or anything smacking of paganism.

The list could go on. The most restrictive Christian publisher, Steeple Hill (an imprint of Harlequin), as late as November of 2009, had a whole list of terms and situations to avoid as too edgy for their audience. Today, while still retaining restrictions, they’ve dropped a lot of that list and have loosened up a bit.

But is this really the definition of edgy Christian fiction?

To answer that, we’ll first define “edgy” in this context.

Daring, provocative, or trend-setting.
American Heritage Dictionary

Daringly innovative; on the cutting edge.
Dictionary.com

Having a bold, provocative, or unconventional quality.
Merriam-Webster

The above list might be provocative for some Christians and therefore daring and bold for the author and publisher, but trend setting? Innovative? That train left a long time ago in the general market.

There’s the catch. Like last week’s post on conversion scenes, what any one person considers edgy will be subjective based on their experience and beliefs. Consequently, it is the audience in general that determines what is edgy for them. What is edgy for a CBA bookstore patron will be viewed as mild and quaint for a majority of Barnes & Noble patrons. Sometimes for a majority of Christians too.

In last week’s comments, Lyn Perry mentioned the following:

My niece who writes Christian women’s fiction included a damn in her book, an organic expression from a character who was failing in life but eventually got back on the road to restoration. A reviewer marked her book as one star saying there were vulgarities in it!

For that reviewer, having a character say, “damn” in a book is edgy. For many Christians and a host of non-Christians, they wouldn’t even blink.

Yet, there is still a problem. Depending on which side of the edgy fence one sits on, the above definition of edgy Christian fiction paints “edgy” as a negative. When people hear “edgy Christian fiction,” they either see it as more realistic fiction or immorality invading Christian fiction. It is like a tug-of-war between the two camps.

My take? Both sides are focused on the wrong edge.

The above list of edgy issues are primarily edgy to Christians. That is the wrong audience to define edgy Christian fiction that we should strive for. I’ll let Jesus sum it up.

Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man’s sake. 23 Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets.
(Luke 6:22-23 KJV)

We are called to be edgy. Not to fellow Christians, but to the general market. How?

By dealing with issues the general market considers edgy using a Christian worldview in a realistic manner. Issues like rape, adultery, premarital sex, marriage, dating, substance abuse, wife abuse, ministerial abuse, homosexuality, politics, greed, earthly authority, or insert your favorite sin. The list is long.

True, dealing with some of those issues may necessitate being edgy to Christians as well. The point is if we are only edgy to Christians, then we’ve missed the blessing Jesus gave us. If we are only edgy to Christians, then we’ve really played it safe and said little. Cussing and sex is not edgy in the general market.

What truly edgy Christian fiction have you read of late?

The 2014 Summer Writing Challenge officially closed submissions at midnight (Pacific time) last night. Now we enter the evaluation phase which is critical to the success of this contest, especially for those whose entries came in near the deadline.

We want all entries to have the opportunity for readers to respond. Consequently, we are dedicating this week to evaluation—thumbs up for the entries we like (an unlimited number) and feedback designed to help writers.

One thing that writers need is to know how their writing comes across to others. Generally we like what we write (or we wouldn’t have written it in the first place), and often our most supportive loved ones—close friends and family—like what we write simply because we wrote it.

But what about that host of readers out there who we hope to engage? Do they get what we’re trying to say? Do they imagine the scene we’re trying to paint? Do they understand the character we’re trying to present?

Along comes the Spec Faith Writing Challenge and readers get to tell writers those very things. It’s a huge opportunity for writers to learn, but it depends upon faithful readers willing to put their opinions out there.

Sometimes these readers are also writers, and they can give technical advice. Sometimes the readers are, well, readers, and they can say what they like and what they didn’t like. Both are helpful, helpful, helpful.

Let’s face it. Writers pay for critiques just to find out what someone else thinks of their writing. Or they join critique groups and drive miles and spend hours reviewing other manuscripts just so they can get feedback on their writing.

Here in the Spec Faith Summer Writing Challenge, readers offer what every writer needs because they want to see Christian speculative fiction become the best it can be. Or because they wish to be helpful. Or perhaps to give back to others what they themselves have received.

Whatever the reason, the strength of the challenge lies in the feedback—because every writer who entered and receives feedback wins a bit of information they can use to become a better writer.

So here’s the second half of the challenge: take time to give feedback to as many entries as you can. Then invite your friends who are readers (and they don’t have to be fans of speculative fiction) to stop by and do likewise. The more feedback a person gets, the more accurate the picture they’ll receive of their writing.

Thanks to all who have and who will participate.

“Thou mortals surely jest.”

So, the Internet is all abuzz about the announcement by Marvel that there’s going to be a female Thor.¹

Due to the media coverage, there’s quite a bit of confusion and misinformation out there. A few key issues are worth clarifying.

1) Thor is not getting a sex change. The person who is Thor will still be around with his gender intact, but the powers of Thor will be wielded by a woman.

When it comes to the confusion, the media is at fault for reporting this “story,” because it’s a pure PR gimmick as anyone who follows the comic book world knows. The average person has a view that most heroes are defined by one person: Peter Parker is Spider-man, Bruce Wayne is Batman, Steve Rogers is Captain America, and Tony Stark is Iron Man. However at different times, Ben Reilly was Spider-man, Bucky Barnes was Captain America, Dick Grayson was Batman, and Jim Rhodes was Iron Man. Comic companies like to imagine that a costumed identity can be passed on. Usually, the character people associate with the identity end up returning, as will no doubt be the case with Thor.

Thor is an odd case. While we can imagine a female Captain America, Thor is not an androgynous name. Marvel does have some precedent to justify this, going back to a What If? alternate universe story for the 1970s as well as both the Young Avenger movies, and the MC2 Universe featuring teenage girls wielding Thor-like powers.

2) This will have no impact whatsoever on the upcoming Avengers movie. The movies and the comics exist in separate universes, though it’s probably fair to wonder if this will all be resolved by the time the movie comes out.

3) Why is Marvel doing this? Because gimmicks are Marvel’s 21st century substitute for writing good stories that people want to read. Through stories like Civil War, One More Day, Avengers v. X-Men, Shadowlands, and the entire Superior Spider-Man saga, Marvel has made a habit of telling stories that violate the characters they’re writing but attract controversy and sell books. Thor is going through this change due to weak sales. In June, Thor: God of Thunder #23 ranked #55 with less than 40,000 copies sold.

As if to emphasize this strategy, the day after word of the female Thor came out, it was announced that the #71 ranked Captain America will feature African-American superhero Sam Wilson as the new Captain America.

Marvel especially likes it when they can start a book off with a new Issue 1. Marvel will have collectors rush to grab it in the hopes that it’ll someday be worth something and will lead to a bump in sales. That’s why they did a new Issue 1 for Daredevil after 36 issues, for the Incredible Hulk after 20 issues, and Captain Marvel after 17.

Like Superior Spider-Man, this is a gimmick that will run until Marvel feels sales slipping, then they’ll go back to the original Thor.

The other thing that drives this is the same thing that drives the, “They should make the next Doctor a woman,” calls that occur whenever Doctor Who is being recast. There’s a belief that women want to see all heroes supplanted with heroines. However, Doctor Who showrunner Stephen Moffat said of the decision not to have a female Doctor, “Oddly enough most people who said they were dead against it — and I know I’ll get into trouble for saying this — were women.”

Having a woman take over the lead in an existing TV show or a comic represents an attempt to grow market share among women that’s seen as less risky than investing the time and marketing budget to create a brand for a new character, but there’s little evidence women are really interested in female characters that are derivative substitutes for male characters. While a female Thor may be a great gimmick, what is more likely to excite readers and viewers are unique and well-written female characters.

Should Christians forgive everyone who offends them?

I don’t believe the Bible teaches this — and it’s a pleasant bonus that most honest stories provide supporting evidence. One such story is acclaimed animated series Avatar: The Last Airbender, and if you haven’t seen the series then please you may read the footnote here but don’t read further because: spoilers.¹

In the season 3 story “The Southern Raiders,” Zuko — whose own journey we explored last week — humbly but boldly confronts Katara for her lack of forgiving him. When he learns why she is particularly bitter against the Fire Nation, Zuko takes a courageous step: he offers to help Katara find the Fire Nation soldier who personally killed Katara’s mother.

“I’m afraid I’m not taking any prisoners today.”

But before they leave, Aang confronts them.

Aang: The monks used to say that revenge is like a two-headed rat viper. While you watch your enemy go down, you’re being poisoned yourself.

Zuko: That’s cute, but this isn’t Air Temple preschool. It’s the real world.

Katara: Now that I know he’s out there, now that I know we can find him, I feel like I have no choice.

Aang: Katara, you do have a choice: forgiveness.²

Aang’s unspoken definition of “forgiveness” is very common among Christians and anyone else. It’s a “forgiveness” based solely on one’s personal feelings about an offender.

In part 1 I defined this “forgiveness” as a sort of pseudonym for relinquishing bitterness or desire for vengeance. Scripture encourages this, because we must love our enemies and not hate them; instead we “leave it to the wrath of God,” Who alone will repay exclusive vengeance against evildoers (Rom. 12:14–21). But Scripture never calls this action “forgiveness,” and only ever defines and encourages forgiveness as an active process in which someone reconciles with an offender who willingly repents of sin.

Unpacking Forgiveness author Chris Brauns challenges the alternate “forgiveness” view:

“Therapeutic forgiveness” insists that forgiveness is at its core a feeling. Our culture has picked up on this in a big way. When most people say that they forgive, they mean that it is a private matter in which he or she is not going to feel bitter. […]

Therapeutic forgiveness also diminishes the necessity of two parties working out there differences. If forgiveness is simply how I feel, there is no need to worry about the relationship.³

Zuko, who knows a little something about not forgiving unrepentant evildoers, challenges Aang’s “forgiveness” understanding:⁴

Zuko: That’s the same as doing nothing!

Aang: No, it’s not. It’s easy to do nothing, but it’s hard to forgive.

Katara: It’s not just hard. It’s impossible.

Such forgiveness is impossible — not if we preserve any Biblical sense of mercy and justice that presents us with two frustrating dual truths: 1) we must love our enemies and pray for offenders, 2) we must know that God Himself will someday punish them (if not save them).

In fact, even as Jesus warns us that we must forgive others — in an immediate and broader ministry context that presumes the offenders have repented, even multiple times⁵ — He bases this on God’s forgiveness, and states that God does not forgive all people:

For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you, but if you do not forgive others their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

Matthew 6:14-15

Soon Katara and Zuko discover the Fire Nation soldier who killed Katara’s mother.

(Katara holds out both her arms to halt the falling raindrops and create a shield above the three of them. After a moments she blasts water at Yon Rha and transforms the stream into a flurry of ice daggers. Yon Rha crouches in fear of death — but soon looks up. The ice daggers float before him. Katara’s expression softens. She releases the daggers, which liquefy and splash to the ground.)

Yon Rha: I did a bad thing! I know I did and you deserve revenge, so why don’t you take my mother? That would be fair!

Katara: (Sorrowfully.) I always wondered what kind of person could do such a thing. But now that I see you, I think I understand. There’s just nothing inside you, nothing at all. You’re pathetic and sad and empty.

Yon Rha: (Whimpering) Please, spare me!

Katara: But as much as I hate you … (She turns away.) I just can’t do it.

(They turn away. Yon Rha continues weeping miserably in the rain as the scene ends)

Katara refuses vengeance. In a sense, she “left it to the wrath of God” — or, in the world of Avatar, to the “wrath” of an ultimately self-correcting universe that punishes evildoers.

(The scene cuts to a boardwalk overlooking the water, later in the day. We see Katara sitting on the edge of the dock with her eyes closed. Sadly she opens her eyes.)

Aang: Katara? Are you okay?

Katara: I’m doing fine.

Aang: Zuko told me what you did. Or what you didn’t do, I guess. I’m proud of you.

Katara: I wanted to do it. I wanted to take out all my anger at him, but I couldn’t. I don’t know if it’s because I’m too weak to do it or because I’m strong enough not to.

Aang: You did the right thing. Forgiveness is the first step you have to take to begin healing.

Katara: (Rises from boardwalk.) But I didn’t forgive him. I’ll never forgive him.

Yes. This is not “forgiveness.” It is simple release of vengeance. True forgiveness is greater, scarier, and more reflective of how God saves. It is only for people who choose to repent and experience reconciliation (or, in some cases, the hope of reconciliation in eternity).

Watch how Avatar’s story beautifully reflects this truth.

Katara: (Smiles at Zuko and walks up to him) … But I am ready to forgive you.

(In a moment that Avatar fans have anticipated for years, ever since the villainous Zuko hated the Avatar then repented of his sin, the two embrace in reconciliation.)

(Next week: We’ll conclude this series by exploring of Aang’s quest to find balance — between his Avatar responsibility to exact justice against the Fire Lord, and the mercy he was always taught to show to all living things.)