on recommending non-Christian books

This is a long blog post. The short version is: I read secular books when I think they have more good than ill in them. And I avoid books that I think will tempt me to sin. But what I should read and what you should read are not necessarily the same thing, so I'm wondering what and how much I ought to say about the potentially objectionable parts of books when I review them, and I'm interested in what other people think on the subject.

I've been thinking of my review of "After the Golden Age" since I posted it. I really did like the book and I know my review reflected that. But it was certainly written from a worldview that differs from mine, and I've been wondering how much I ought to comment on that when I review books.

I regularly read both Christian and non-Christian books. I'm careful about what I read insofar as I avoid reading anything that I think will tempt me to sin, but I often read authors I disagree with. I know that's not unusual, especially when it comes to non-fiction books - what good Christian thinker, after all, would shy away from learning from Plato or Aristotle? But I wonder if it's less common when it comes to fiction.

There are a couple of potential problems when it comes to reading secular fiction - I'd separate them into the problem of character and the problem of author.

The problem of character is that you're going to have characters in the story doing things you disagree with. They're going to sin in all kinds of creative ways. This, actually, isn't so much of a problem. Everyone you meet in real life sins in all kinds of ways too - and that probably goes for the person you see in the mirror too. And while I'd expect a Christian to repent and make good, I don't expect non-Christian characters to conform to my ethics any more than I expect real non-Christians too. People who disagree with me are just a part of life and it doesn't bother me overmuch that they're a part of my reading life too.

The problem of author is a little harder, because there is telling and there is persuasion. Take adultery: you can write about it well and you can write about it poorly. Adultery could be the subject of the greatest Christian masterpiece (try something like Graham Green's "The End of the Affair") or the filthiest piece of trash ever to be set into type. It's not what you write about, it's how you write about it. I mean, think about it: every time you see a crucifix, you're seeing a piece of art on - among other things - the subject of torture. Is torture something you're normally willing to read about? I'm not, not usually. But my love of Lars Walker's "The Year of the Warrior" and Stephen Lawhead's "Byzantium" tells me that I'm willing to entertain the subject when it's really, really, really well-presented, and that by Christian artists.

When you read books by non-Christians, you're going to basically be allowing someone to try to persuade you to think about ethical issues in a way that disagrees with your faith.

At least, you might be. You might, if that's what the book is about. You might not be though: there are plenty of secular works that have large areas of agreement with the Christian faith. As far as I know, Lois McMaster Bujold is not a Christian. But her book "Memory" taught me yards and miles and ells about what integrity is and means and looks like. Are there parts of her work I disagree with? Certainly. Am I a better Christian for having read her work? On the whole, I think I am. Her idea of courage, for instance, largely accords with the Christian ideal, especially in books like "The Curse of Chalion".

St. Augustine talked about "stealing the treasures of Egypt", or, how all truth is God's truth, and it's ours to take wherever we find it. This is true, and I think there's a lot of truth to be found in works that aren't overtly Christian. The universe was ordered by an intelligent Creator, and any creature of His who approaches it thoughtfully and makes art out of what he finds will inevitably showcase some of that inherent order and beauty put there by God, whether that artist himself believes in God or not.

On the other hand, Augustine pointed out that the real treasure isn't in any of these secular works, but in God's own word. And we can certainly get so caught up in the art of the creature that we forget to turn our eyes towards our Creator. And that is disaster.

So, that's what goes through my mind - or that should - when I pick up a book. I still don't know how much of a disclaimer I should add to my reviews of non-Christian books. I've assumed that most people who read my blog have their own rule for what they will and won't read, and know their own individual weaknesses and watch out for them. For example, I know some people I admire that can handle art that's a lot more terrifying or depressing than I can handle. They can learn from it and be edified by it, but I'd just be a weeping puddle of goo if I watched what they watch or read what they read. And I know that, so I avoid those works of art. They might be good, but they're not good for me.

(And that's no statement on the relativity of eternal principles. Eternal principles are eternal principles. But I am mortal, mutable, and small, and so it's about the application of eternal principles to such a one as me.)

I hope that anyone reading my book reviews will take it as given that I'm assuming you'll do your own assessment of whether or not the book I'm reviewing is something you should read. For example, "After the Golden Age" has a heroine who has (off-stage/off-page) sex before marriage. I liked the romance in the book regardless, because, given who the character was (a non-Christian I wasn't expecting to act like a Christian), she did a great job of discerning which man was good for her and which wasn't and why. That's what I liked about the romance in the story. And I felt able to say, "this part is good" and "this part isn't" without being tempted to change my mind about Christian sexual ethics. Did I agree with all the heroine's choices? No. But did I think there was something good to learn from the good choices she did make? Yes.

But should every person read the book? I don't know. How can I? Maybe someday, as I grow and mature, I'll come to the realization that I shouldn't have read it. Or maybe not. Maybe I'll always think it was a good decision.

The point is, though, that I think we all have to take responsibility for our own choices in regard to the art we consume.

The other point is that I don't want to lead anyone into temptation - I don't want to highlight pieces of art that will hinder anyone in their walk with God.

But if I only talk about absolutely perfect books, I am left talking about only one Book.

(Some people in some places at some times might tell me this is not a bad thing.)

Anyway, I suppose I haven't quite reached a conclusion here, so let me open it up to discussion. How do you decide what you're going to review? If it's a worthy piece of art with a few problematical elements, how do you present it to your readers? Do you present it to your readers? Are there things you absolutely won't read or recommend (I know I have some very solid lines myself)? If you like the book reviews I do here, would you prefer a heads-up on anything, content-wise, and if so, what? Also, what about heads-up on method (i.e., not the "what" of the book but the "how" the author handles it)?

This is one I'm still thinking about. I'm sure about some of it, but there's a lot of it, especially the new-media aspects, that I'm still pondering, and would really love to hear your thoughts about.

Peace of Christ to you,
Jessica Snell