Christian Readers discussion

Christian Fiction is in need of more diversity—and readers can help!

Read the blog post here:
➡️ https://wp.me/pwlMY-4Fr

Hi Nadine, great article! I left a comment which I hope got posted.

Joshua wrote: "Hi Nadine, great article! I left a comment which I hope got posted."

Thanks so much, Joshua! I found your comment in my spam box and moved it to the main post. :^)

An interesting article, Nadine. I try to write my novels in a style that doesn't label anyone for the most part. Only I, as the author, know the race of the characters who went through my mind's eye as I wrote, but I leave it up to the reader to visualize the characters for themselves. I try to ride that fine line between leading the reader and allowing them to catch their own vision of the story. It's my belief the reader can become part of the story in that manner instead of just reading the words.

D.l. wrote: "An interesting article, Nadine. I try to write my novels in a style that doesn't label anyone for the most part. Only I, as the author, know the race of the characters who went through my mind's ey..."

Yes indeed! I often incorporate elements into my stories that I purposely leave ambiguous or up to the reader's interpretation or discovery, like elements in a parable. And then there are times when I'm more explicit to get a specific detail or message across. Both are valid methods in good storytelling that have their place.

I know other authors intentionally leave out the race(s) of their characters as well, and I don't make a point of race in all of my stories when it just isn't a point of the story. :^D

Other times I'm more explicit about it to get a specific message across, and it can be just as important to know the races/cultural backgrounds of particular characters as it is to know other vital aspects of their personhood. Origin, ethnicity, culture, heritage—there all important parts of life, and God makes us the same but different for a reason. Christian Fiction is a great place to openly represent and celebrate those differences. Not necessarily in every story or from every author, but as a whole, the ChristFic genre can and should represent diversity well. :^)

Nadine wrote: "D.l. wrote: "An interesting article, Nadine. I try to write my novels in a style that doesn't label anyone for the most part. Only I, as the author, know the race of the characters who went through..."

We should always represent the diversity that is our real life. I was once chided about a character in one of my short stories. I was very specific about their speech and mannerisms. I got a speech about making "the janitor" obviously black and unintelligent. The problem with that was I specifically used a mix of two people I know to form the character, neither of them black, neither of them unintelligent. It can be difficult at times to break through the preconceived notions of our readers.

D.l. wrote: "Nadine wrote: "D.l. wrote: "An interesting article, Nadine. I try to write my novels in a style that doesn't label anyone for the most part. Only I, as the author, know the race of the characters w..."

Oh dear! I suppose we all bring a lot of our biases along with us when we read, whether consciously or subconsciously, and as the saying goes (kind of), no two people ever truly read the same book. Each individual filters the words through their personal experiences, opinions, worldview, etc.

We authors can't control what others will see in our work, but we paint the best picture we can and hope at least most of the people who encounter it will get something good out of it, whatever their individual filters/outlooks may be. :^)

Hi,
When I first read the title of this discussion, I thought you were talking about Calvinists and Catholics getting along together. That's the world I live in. Diversity (and division) used to be more about which church I go to than what I look like. That doesn't mean that I live in an "all white" world. I don't like to share my personal life, but I purposefully wrote racially ambiguous characters in some of my younger-audience books because I have a lot of relatives who are mixed in their ethnic backgrounds and I did not want to alienate them by describing the specific skin tones or eye features of each character. (I recently read a wonderful children's book that did exactly this and I realized that this seems to be the direction at least some of the authors are moving. This, to me, is very encouraging.)

I just came back to this thread because I've run into this issue quite a bit over the past year while looking for an agent and trying to promote my latest manuscript to the traditional publishing industry. There seems to be a lot of signaling coming from that part of the industry that they're open to "diverse" writers by using things like #Div-Pit and "#ownvoices" in their social media posts. However, what I've encountered is not a desire to accept writers for what they are. Instead, it seems like the movement is causing us all to be lumped into these big, ambiguous groups that don't really represent who we are at all. Apparently I'm not allowed to share my great grandmother's Native traditions or the African folktales of a family friend I have known since I was 5 because my skin is too pale for it to not be seen as "cultural appropriation" by those who glance at my profile pic. I've also experienced discrimination in the Christian literary industry because I am "not allowed" to write romantic literature that might market to women because I am a man. Yes, that's where this has brought us. I used to worry about offending the evangelicals or the anabaptists with a carelessly worded piece of dialogue in my writing. Now I have to worry about revealing my gender or my ethnicity when I pitch my manuscript to an industry professional.

So, in my experience (and thus my opinion) diversity is a poisoned word no matter how you attempt to use it. It would be better to simply ignore "diversity" and look inward to the character of each person we encounter. After all, is that not one of the most powerful aspects of writing a book: allowing us to let the reader look inside the character without having to stumble over any preconceived notions enforced by outward appearance?

R.J. wrote: "Hi,
When I first read the title of this discussion, I thought you were talking about Calvinists and Catholics getting along together. That's the world I live in. Diversity (and division) used to be..."

Gee, thank you for coming back and sharing, R.J. :^)

The thing is, a lot of words and distinctions become poisoned in the publishing industry (and anywhere else, for that matter) when people use them incorrectly, or take them out of context, or become prejudiced by them, or become blinded by stigmas, etc.

Even the name of my primary genre, "Christian Fiction," is a stigmatized term. For many people, the name of the genre is synonymous with poor writing and inept storytelling (and unfortunately, those people aren't always wrong). Lots of readers steer clear of ChristFic because they assume the authors will be annoying and presumptuous, disrespecting or disregarding the art of fiction by delivering sermons under the thin guise of stories, using plots and characters as props to push religious agendas on readers. "As long as Bible verses and prayers and such are stuffed into the stories, ChristFic authors and fans can't tell or don't care how amateurish or flat-out bad the writing may be."

"Christian Fiction," "female," "African American," "romance," "indie author," "novellas"—all of these terms have stigmas attached and prejudices to face in the book world. And all of these terms are important parts of my identity and what I'm doing in the book world. If I allow other people's negativity, prejudgments, and critical or backward uses of the terms to make me afraid of the language, or to convince me that I should ignore those terms and what they stand for, then I could wind up trying to hide more and more about what I'm doing.

"Most people roll their eyes at Christian Fiction or treat it like the plague, so don't associate any of your work with that genre."

"Readers hate self-published books, so don't ever let anyone know you're an independent author."

"People think all novellas are rushed with underdeveloped plots and characters, so just stick to calling all of your books novels."

"Folks assume all romance books are melodramatic, smutty, escapist fairy tales that don't reflect real life, so it's best not to be too vocal about the fact that some of your books are romances."

"Don't let readers know you're female. They'll assume you can't write with strength, grit, or fire."

"You know how much racism there is in the publishing industry, including in Christian Fiction. And so many ChristFic readers aren't ready or interested in reading books by or about people of color, or they'll even purposely steer clear of you if your books seem too 'Black.' So do your best to hide your African American heritage, or else plan to write books that only Black folks will read."

I'm sure those aren't the only ways I'd have to hide who I am and the nature of my work if I were making an effort to attract and please everyone and to offend or dissatisfy absolutely no one.

Now, it's totally an author's privilege to pursue publishing in the way that works best for them. I don't fault authors who use pen names or who steer clear of author photos or what else they may do to keep themselves from becoming distractions to readers, to help their books make it through to the right audience.

(And when I hear about or experience the extra hoops some authors have to jump through, extra precautions they have to take, or walls they run into as they struggle for acceptance, it hurts me. It even hurts to read what you shared above, partly because I know the purpose of the #OwnVoices movement, to help make a needed place for marginalized voices in publishing, is getting either lost or twisted in some areas even though the movement is supposed to be helping authors and readers, not tearing people down.)

But as for diversity, there's nothing inherently or truly wrong with it—neither the term nor what it stands for. I believe God has seen fit to create a world where skin tones vary, and more than that, where different cultures thrive and can display the beauty of what it means to come from such a multidimensional, multifaceted Creator. Varieties of color, fragrance, flavor, language, tradition, and so much more come with diversity.

No, racial/ethnic distinctions aren't important or even necessary for every work of fiction, and I myself have written some racially ambiguous fiction by design. Still, representing and appreciating different origins and the various aspects of culture and qualities that we inherit from those who come before us is so important.

Sure, there are people twisting the idea of diversity into something backward, counterproductive, divisive, frightening, controversial, and even hateful. Nonetheless, because I believe diversity is an invaluable gift from God meant to unite us, to show us the beauty in acknowledging and celebrating our wonderful differences (including but not at all limited to our different, God-given outward appearances) and the legacies we bring to the table of humanity, I'm personally choosing not to shy away from diversity. I'm choosing to stand up for what I believe diversity is truly meant to be.

Yes, it can be an uphill battle at times. (Whew!) But publishing in general is no easy road to navigate, and as the saying goes: Anything worth having is worth fighting for.

Good Job. God created diversity at the Tower of Babel. It is part of the History of His people in the old Testament and New! Its all through His Word. And, it isn't fiction. How can we learn about other cultures either in fiction or non-fiction. Keep up the fight.

Nadine wrote: "R.J. wrote: "Hi,
When I first read the title of this discussion, I thought you were talking about Calvinists and Catholics getting along together. That's the world I live in. Diversity (and divisio..."

Well said.

At first I assumed you were complaining that people were ignoring your works because (you felt) they were avoiding "diversity", but now I can see that you've done a lot better at finding your niche than I have. It looks like you've been fighting this battle (at least as an indie publisher) as long as I have, and judging by the number of works and reviews, I'd say you're doing a much better job of it than I am. And you've got a pretty good sermon-writing talent there, too.

What you said about stigmas is very true and is something I think most of us are wrestling with, but part of the problem is not so much the "negative" stigmas of words as it is the "positive" association of genres with certain images. For instance, both romance and fantasy "require" a main character on the cover (I know some books successfully break this rule, but rarely does an indie author get away with it). This is something I have struggled with on almost all of my books (and all of my covers do break the genre rules in one way or another--much to the chagrin of my bottom line).

When I started indie publishing I was imagining the children in my church and my family reading the books. Since they are all very different in appearance, and since I purposefully wrote the story so that any reader could imagine themselves to be the main character, I chose not to put characters on the covers. My goodness how certain people in the industry criticized me for doing this. I couldn't even get the paperbacks into my local Christian bookstore because the arrogant manager insisted they wouldn't get anybody to flip them over to read the back--just because they didn't have a human on the cover!!!

One of the reasons I came back to this thread was because we faced this problem again while we were working on my "adventure romance" and I told my cover artist I wanted to follow genre rules--but again, I wrote the main characters as racially ambiguous. So again, we compromised. The characters are silhouetted (and small on the page), but then it looks like we made the mistake of breaking the stereotypical associations of "Christian Fiction" by having a certain traditional Christian architectural decoration on the cover that is now associated with vampire romances.

So I guess what I am saying is that you are probably more right than you know you are when it comes to prejudice-at-first-glance. But unfortunately, "diversity" has come to mean only a very small part of the problem.

Linda wrote: "Good Job. God created diversity at the Tower of Babel. It is part of the History of His people in the old Testament and New! Its all through His Word. And, it isn't fiction. How can we learn about ..."

Blessings, Linda! Thank you for the encouragement. :-)

R.J. wrote: "Hi,
When I first read the title of this discussion..."

Heeheehee, I'll admit I don't quite understand the human-on-the-cover "requirement." Seems I've been finding plenty of romances for years without people pictured on the front, and the different design approaches can strike a variety of tones.

Now, mostly because I love the topic of cover design (tee-HEE, I even post an annual list and give out awards for Favorite Covers on my blog), and others may see this discussion, I can't resist naming a few ChristFic romance examples.

Both the first book and the 3-book collection cover for this series by Sarah Monzon are people-less. The designs for the series overall have creative detail that stands out. (Indie published.)



While it personally isn't my favorite trend, animals are quite the rage for book covers now. This romance series by Dana Mentink goes the all-doggie route. (Traditionally published.)



The Chicory Inn series by Deborah Raney has beautiful covers. A blend of scenic and homey, I'd say. The last book in the series, Home at Last, is about an interracial couple, but of course there's no need to feature the characters on the book cover when the rest of the series' covers are people-less as well. At least for the English editions of the novels. (Traditionally published.)



Sophie's Heart by Lori Wick is an enduring favorite for so many ChristFic romance fans (some who reread the novel every year). First published 25 years ago and still selling. In the past, it's had two versions of a cover featuring a locket. (Traditionally published.)



The Samurai's Heart by Walt Mussell is a special case. It's a historical romance, and the Japanese setting lends itself to a strong, recognizable theme that doesn't require showing people to get the message across. But this book stands out to me because it started out indie (indeed, the paperback edition is still independently published), but the author landed a traditional publishing contract for the Kindle edition specifically on account of the book's popularity among readers, back when the Kindle Scout program was still in existence. Hahahaha, I was one of the readers who voted for this romantic book!



And just as one more romance example, no, traditionally published New York Times bestselling author Debbie Macomber isn't a ChristFic author, but she's a Christian as far as I know, and the covers of plenty of her novels follow the trend of many romances that don't feature people on the front.



As for fantasy, I'm newer to the genre. That is, I loved some fantasy books as a child but only just returned to the genre a few years ago. An example that stands out to me is the Sunlit Lands ChristFic fantasy series by Matt Mikalatos. I'm behind on reading the series, but one thing I love most about the stories is the distinctly multicultural cast of characters. Yet, the covers work just fine without the characters being pictured. (Traditionally published.)



I must confess I didn't finish Fawkes by Nadine Brandes (LOVE her first name!) when I tried it, but the utterly awesome cover alone would encourage me to give this fantasy novel another go. (Traditionally published.)



To Best the Boys by Mary Weber does have a little bit of a person featured on the cover. But the cover's main attraction is from the major event in the book, navigating the labyrinth, and the design, along with some intricate typography work, capitalizes on that. (Traditionally published.)



And a NYT bestselling author I am not. I'm still finding my way as an indie, but I can say my Movement of Crowns historical fantasy series fares much better now than it did back when I tried to keep adding people to the covers. Just couldn't find (or didn't have access to) the right images of real models to represent the characters at the time, and some computer-generated characters had the right "look" and clothing from a technical standpoint but were aesthetically too computer-y for the historical fiction/love story audience I wanted to reach. So it seems so far that my latest designs strike a balance for fantasy readers and HistFic readers alike, without anyone from my multicultural cast of characters being pictured. Granted, in the completely fictional world of this series and the spin-offs that follow it, the different cultures are all made-up, heehee.





I do take into account what I see and hear the trends and rules or "requirements" are in publishing. But whenever I hear directly from fellow ChristFic readers, many who love to weigh in and express their preferences, there always seems to be a pretty even split between those who prefer to see people on the covers and those who prefer designs without any people on them, especially among romance readers. What tends to be most important for readers on the whole, though, is cover designs that look professional, no matter what other specific elements appear or not.

Hearing what readers say, and seeing many romance and fantasy covers with a variety of design approaches, it doesn't seem to me like "humans or no humans pictured" is really a concrete either/or issue, with one being an absolute better choice than the other. It seems to me that it just depends, as it's possible to create dynamic designs—from images to visual effects and embellishments to typography (typography is oftentimes what makes or breaks the overall look and quality of a book cover design, no matter how great the images may be)—with or without picturing people on the covers.

Again, I'm mostly saying all of this just because I love talking covers, and I don't know who all else might see this thread. :^)

(Continuing in the reply below...)

R.J. wrote: "Hi,
When I first read the title of this discussion..."

Now, I must admit that as an author, what may or may not be the preferences for brick and mortar bookstores and their managers hasn't been my concern in recent years, personally. I started approaching local bookstores back when I was traditionally published, but it didn't take me long to realize: pushing to get on bookstore shelves wasn't a struggle I was ready for.

And since then, the majority of bookstores I used to shop at have closed down their physical locations to go online-only or have gone out of business altogether, both Christian and secular stores. I might be one of the many customers who contributed to that, but as a longtime Christian Fiction reader, I became frustrated and dissatisfied with the lack of variety on the bookshelves, including the constant lack of racial/cultural diversity available from Christian booksellers.

With a wider, more diverse selection becoming available in other places online, including independently published titles, the brick and mortar bookstores became more and more irrelevant to me as a customer. Similarly, as an author, it became apparent to me that the idea of seeing my books on physical bookstore shelves was more of a nostalgic dream from a different time/era in publishing than a present-day necessity for an author working in an increasingly digital world.

That's not to say I think all authors should be giving up on brick and mortar, and I know the local bookstore scene isn't the same everywhere as it is in my area. Just explaining why my focus as a reader and author has turned online, at least for the foreseeable...present. ;-)

Beyond that, where publishing in general is concerned, I know the "noes" can often outnumber the "yeses" on this road.

No, your manuscript is too long.
No, your manuscript is too short.
No, your idea is too unoriginal.
No, your idea is too different.
No, we're not going to publish that here.
No, we're not going to sell that here.
We don't know how to market books like yours.
It'll be another twenty years before Christian bookstores will carry books like yours...

And on and on. So when even a faint glimmer of a "yes" peeks on through, I zero in and take a hold of it for all I'm worth! And sometimes I go ahead and see what I can do to make my own "yes" when I can't seem to find one.

That's a big reason why I've gone indie. Maybe I'll try for and land another traditional publishing contract one day. Who knows? Still, for the kind of writing I'm absorbed in now, the indie route is apparently the best fit.

And for me, a single "yes" from a reader, a life touched, is what makes this challenging road worth it. One "yes" here, another "yes" there, a setback today, a bounce-back tomorrow, one step at a time, one day at a time... They do begin to add up, to show a line of progress being made, but it's still a step by step, day by day journey in publishing. You know?

Hahahaha, not exactly on the original blog topic I posted about readers helping to bring more needed diversity to ChristFic, but I hope the rest of this adequately fits!