Howdy all,
I am working on my novel and puzzling over this one question. Do I use overt Christian scenes in the book, sort of as Lewis did, or do I just write an excellent story which is 'Christian' in nature, as Tolkien did? Right now it's on the Lewis end of things but I'm wondering if that will turn more people off then it would help?

How have y'all approached this in your stories?

eru

I personally write overtly Christian but either works. It really depends on how you want the story to progress.

I tend to lean more towards the Lewis writing style myself, but that's because I grew up reading Narnia and it's the only reason I write... So it's hard for me to write any other way.

As for whether or not that turns off people, I'm not quite sure. A girl I know read my book and she said she rather liked it, despite her not being Christian. I asked her if any of the Christian elements bothered and she said she didn't, in fact, she seemed kind of interested in how I portrayed Christianity.

I think the main goal, when writing such strong allegory as Lewis, is to tread carefully. You can have very blunt objects of Christianity that even non-Christians can catch up on, but just so long as you aren't 'preachy' (so to speak) there's really no reason it would bother anyone.

Of course, even though I can't write like Tolkien, I do enjoy reading his books and how he portrays them. So it's really up to you.

Bethany Faith

I go more for the Tolkien approach, but not in fantasy.

Note that Lewis only included more-or-less-overt parallels of Biblical stories in a very few of the Narnia books, and even there it was rather subtle. But however you handle it, it should be a natural, organic part and outgrowth of your story, rather than added on.

And on the gripping hand, I find that a story that draws on Biblical---or even other historical---storylines too heavily, unless it's explicitly a retelling or reimagining of those stories, to not be as credible. Lewis's approach (what would God's dealings with this utterly different country be like?) seems far better---as a matter of art and craft, not merely as a matter of effectiveness in getting past what he called "watchful dragons"---than simply translating a Bible story into a different invented context.

I would just write what comes naturally and not worry about it.

Well, part of it isn't even overt parallels but just having a God (Emperor-Over-The-Sea) and having Him have a relationship with other characters. Tolkien, in contrast, doesn't even have God mentioned in LotR (At least to my knowledge)

Good thoughts all, thanks!

eru

I think Manwe was mentioned, once.

Tolkien actually did have a "God" behind Middle Earth named Illuvatar, in addition to "angelic" beings called the Valar that Illuvatar created to guide His creation. The creation story and such are more clearly outlined in The Silmarillion than in any Lord of the Rings books, although they are touched on occasionally.

Of course, a lot more could be said on the topic. Just thought I'd mention that, whether or not Tolkien wrote overtly Christian messages in the Lord of the Rings, at least the structure of his world fit into a generally Biblical framework.

@Evenstar: I realize that. However, in his main LotR books, God is barely mentioned.

eru

Note that Tolkien was a Roman Catholic, and in LotR Elbereth (the Middle-Earth equivalent of the Virgin Mary) is more than mentioned. And Tolkien also wrote in the foreword to LotR (after describing briefly what it would actually have looked like if it were an allegory with the Ring representing the atomic bomb, as some had apparently suggested):
which explains the absence of any further religious or spiritual references.

"Natural" and "Organic" were precisely the words I had planned to use. Well said.

If I'm remembering correctly, there's a passage in Letters to Children where Lewis indicates that he did not set out to write books that presented religious elements in a fantasy setting, but rather that he wanted to write a good story and that the Christian bits crept in of their own accord - and that he was as surprised as anybody! And so that's the model that I aspire to write after, though in practice I do more worldbuilding than writing and the creation of the world and religious beliefs of the peoples tend to end up on paper somewhere, if not in the stories themselves.

If that method doesn't appeal to you, the second course of action I'd recommend would be to write what you enjoy reading.


As for the Allegory quote, I don't have the resource to hand but I've read something somewhere (blast the disorganization of my library!) that indicates that the sense in which he used the word isn't precisely what we usually think of as allegory today... Our loose definition is any story (particularly a religious one) wherein something can be seen to stand for something else. The definition used to be much stricter in Tolkien's day. Bit of a tangent, sorry.





All in the back-story, all in the back-story! And a bit in the Appendices. Oh, bless poor John Ronald's heart. He would have LIKED everyone to see that bit, but of course the Silmarillion isn't what everyone wanted to read.

I was rather amused reading your comment, complete with signature, considering that the Creator of Middle Earth is none other than Eru Iluvatar! ~_^

This is a tangent that I debated going on in my post, so I'll follow it just slightly further.

My understanding is that the meaning most people most commonly use today, which also makes sense of Tolkien's statement, is a simple "this represents that, this represents that, ..." that doesn't even have to be consistent or complete, and basically boils down to symbolism, but is generally embarrassingly overt. It's also usually didactic in purpose. But (and here I refer to Lewis, who literally wrote the book---The Allegory of Love---on the subject) this denotation is plain-and-simple wrong; an allegory is a tale in which there are an outer story and an inner story (e.g. a romance as the outer story, and the war within the woman's emotions---depicted as a real war, with each emotion perhaps represented by a knight appropriately named---as the inner story) going on, and the outer story is being told by means of the inner story. (Lewis puts this so much better than I, especially since I don't understand it well enough myself, and at greater length.) I wish Tolkien hadn't used the term "allegory"; from his position and his association with Lewis, he should have known better.

*Acknowledges KingJon's mastery*

Exactly, dear sir, exactly. My thanks for the clarification.

I personally feel there are many ways for us to minister through our writings, Andrew. As you know, my own stories do not contain explicit references to Christ. I think you can minister through story telling without having a direct bee line for the cross.

I correlate it to my parent’s salvation. They were not saved due to someone telling them about Christ and all the things they were doing wrong. Instead, they came to salvation because a Christian couple decided to minister to them through actions. My parents knew there was something different about Steve and Alary. They just had something. They had problems just like everyone else, but they handled them differently. They always had hope. It was many many weeks before my parent’s even hear the word Christian come out of their mouths. And by that point, my Daddy had decided he liked these people. So when their Christianity was verbalized, my parents already had a love for these people. They knew they weren't hypocrites.

My parents came to salvation through the actions of a family. Eventually they were given the truth in words, but my Daddy would never, ever, have listened had that groundwork not been laid down first.

I enjoy explicit Christian pieces, Left Behind (although I don’t necessarily agree with all the theology in there) being one of them. However, I also see tremendous value in showing Christ, without speaking His name directly. I find neither wrong. I think it comes down to what Christ has in store for your work.

@Roundelais: I have noticed that. Hence why it is always lower case.



This is true, but its often a hard balance to strike. And this doesn't even need to be limited to Allegory, necessarily (Roundelais and kingjon, thank you for defining allegory a little bit clearer for me; 'twas helpful). I mean, there is a third respect where the book isn't allegory yet contains Christian elements. I guess my book would fall into this camp. Unfortunately it's this category that comes across as...preachy.

eru

Most of what gets called "allegory" nowadays is merely overly-overt and overly-didactic symbolism in this third category, like I said. But "preachy" is, to some extent, in the eye of the reader; I think I've encountered some who made that complaint about the Lord of the Rings, while I think that even John White's Archives of Anthropos series ("like Narnia, but more obvious") isn't "preachy". In the end, all you can do to avoid being "preachy" is to not be preaching or teaching; to tell "history, true or feigned" (as Tolkien put it), rather than a parable or moral-fable under false colors.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned--or, at least, I didn't see anyone say this yet--but I personally believe that really depends on the audience you're trying to reach. For example: Christians, after all, would be much more forgiving if you used an allegory than nonbelievers would. Then again, there are many Christian readers who don't like allegories just as much as nonbelievers.

Take, for another example, the differences between Tolkien, Lewis, Bunyan, and... oh, let's throw Dekker in there for fun.

Tolkien strove to build a world, not just a story, and it was practically overflowing with radical ideas born from his worldview. It was, in no better words, an Epic Fantasy; and through its radical, contrasting ideas, it pointed to big things in the real world.

Lewis, on the other hand, had a lot of religious themes in his story. His work was, however, still only a story, and he had no desire to make an allegory. This is why his writing is so accepted by nonbelievers, because those that don't realize the stark similarities can appreciate the grand story.

Now, Bunyan... good Mr. John Bunyan. He went a completely different route and targeted the believer by making a very obvious allegorical tale in relation to the common Christian's walk. Still a good story, but for a different audience.

Different from all of these in some way is Dekker, who really tackles hard subjects and is loved by believers and nonbelievers alike for his darker stories. He does earn himself some controversial criticism from the Christian community though...

And so, I say all that to make the point that it really does depend on who you want to reach. Personally, I usually steer away from heavily obvious Christian themes since I'm trying to write to the lost. My books are always heavily influenced by my worldview, however, even though the characters do have real problems and sometimes misled beliefs. But, by the end, they usually 'get it' or are on their way. My simple goal with my books isn't to save people; it's simply to lead people to the cross so they can see the choice they have before them for eternity.

Anyway, decide who you want to reach and try to talk to that one or two people you know you just might be able to talk to. No one person can save the world, but we all have the capacity to change a life. So let your light shine and let it shine bright. God will bless your efforts if you do it for His glory and in His will.

There's my half-penny.

On a scale from one to ten with Lewis at one and Tolkien at ten, I would probably be at five. I want to be a little more like Tolkien than Lewis was, but I was mostly inspired by Lewis, and I think the reason for me to write is... well, I just wrote out my 'vision'. I just did this today and haven't edited it, so hopefully it isn't too bad, but it shows how "Lewisish" I am/want to be, hope this isn't somehow off-topic:

To help/make readers think about deep (and not that deep) theological issues in a new light, learning a new way to think and a new way to see that hopefully helps them see things they hadn’t noticed yet; to show people things in an angle that shows them other aspects of that same thing.

This is what Lewis did for me, and what I hope to do for others. But I also want to be a little more subtle in places.

Revisiting this discussion is interesting. When it comes to choosing how to display Christianity in our work, I totally agree with Toby Mac. He said that it's not our buildings and cathedrals, it's not our arguments, it's not our music and it's not our words. Those are to edify the body and glorify God. What stops the world in their tracks is living a life of love. For that reason, I write without thinking about whom in particular will read it. I just know that I have a story I want to tell and it is God who teaches me to tell it. I think Lewis and Tolkien probably wrote for the same reasons. I don't plan on having any particular style so if I end up more like one or the other that's fine. I do tend towards Lewis though, I believe.

Indeed. (especially when I realized that there is actually someone else out there that has heard of the Archives of Anthropos. )

So far in my worldbuilding and writing, Christian elements have come naturally. However, I haven't written allegory (and don't really intend to do so) so I think I would be close to Tolkien (I hope so anyways ).

I personally cannot choose between Tolkien or Lewis.
Both were very good friends throughout their lives. hmmmm.....

Lewis's writing is really a focusing on Christ and ''Aslan'' taking over ( like Gods Kingdom taking over ).
Tolkien had a very creative mind in which he took mythology and truth to create, what seems to be, an out working of Gods plan and the ''return of the king''.
The two writers seem to complement each other.....
Errrhhh... sorry I think this one is impossible to be inclusive.
Lets just take the disjunctive as being exclusive and having both of them?

My novels don't have "Christian themes" so I can't help.

What I mean by that is that I honor God in my writing, but I don't apply Him or any Bible references in my stories, neither directly nor indirectly.

I don't think a Chistian is capable of writing a "secular" novel. Why? Because we're not going to lie when we portray reality. If we just portray reality realistically, then our worlds will fit within the Christian framework - if we call good good, if beauty is beauty, if evil is evil, etc.

I like both Tolkien and Lewis, and have used both methods, and will continue to do so.

And Lewis wasn't at all a Bible-thumper... it took several years for a lot of people to pick up on the themes in his books.

Precisely.

Or, rather, it's possible for a Christian to write a "secular" novel, because it's possible for a Christian to have a worldview that's thoroughly confused on all sorts of issues. But a Christian shouldn't be able to write a "secular" story.

Right.

And, I can't choose between Lewis or Tolkien either... they're different.

I'd say find the balance you are most comfortable with. I chose to take a more Tolkien esque approach. Using a clergy man as a main character of a semi secular fantasy world. With christian allegory mostly implanted throughout the world's history.

I tend to take a blended approach, but leaning more toward Lewis's approach. Tolkien didn't claim his works to be distinctly Christian, but rather books influenced by his faith, because it was so deeply ingrained in his life that aspects of it couldn't help working their way into his story. Lewis took a more direct approach, but wasn't blatantly overt, preferring to slip his message through in a disguised form so as not to turn off scorners or doubters of "religion."

My books have Christian themes, certainly, as that is a natural part of writing for a believer. But to the casual observer who knows (or cares) nothing about God, Christ, and the True Faith, the themes would likely be hidden, and they would see it (I assume since I haven't tested this) as nothing more than an entertaining book of fantasy containing principles and values most people would agree with, but which, without further understanding, wouldn't connect specifically with Christianity.

I think the main thing to consider is your audience. Are you writing primarily to fellow believers who could easily discern underlying truths, or are you writing, to paraphrase Lewis, "to use fiction as a medium to steal past the watchful dragons of organized religion" and present the Truth to unsuspecting non-believers who aren't interested in anything more than an enjoyable story. I hope that my books fit both categories: being undoubtedly Christian but not in a way that would immediately turn off an unbeliever. Lewis was a master at this; look at the popularity of Narnia in secular circles and Christian circles.

I don't tend to do any allegories like Lewis, but I will sometimes talk about the God of the fantasy world, which Tolkien didn't do, so I guess I'm kind of a mix between them...