Some advice on a scene...?

[jillbrenna]

I have a question about a scene I wish to write, wherein my MC has to "retrieve" his sister who has Down syndrome from a pastor's family who is caring for her while his grandmother, her caretaker, is ill. He simply needs to pick her up at their house and bring her home, but the question of her guardianship - the Grandmother is in danger of passing away - will come up later in the book, and he is very concerned that she not be overly-influenced by - or eventually go to live with - this family.

I'm an atheist, and my MC is as well, or at least he's definitely questioning his grandmother's religious - or really I guess more like agnostic or humanistic (she represents the best side of religion I can bring myself to muster up!) - upbringing of them.

His sister is the easily-influenced character in the situation, of course, and the MC has helped his girlfriend flee a religiously-abusive situation earlier in the novel, so he is clearly concerned for how his sister will absorb the influence of the pastor's family.

My problem with approaching this scene is this: I don't want the novel to "turn people off" who are Christian: more than anything, I want them to have to think through the issues of religion and control and choice, because I was once Christian and I've rejected it for a better way of living, now, where I believe people are more free to live as they would choose to. I see freedom from imposed religion as our most sincere, personal, Democratic freedom.

I want to make sure I portray the Pastor's family in my scene in an open-hearted way that wouldn't turn off some Christian readers who wouldn't otherwise listen to my message, yet still demonstrates that my MC, and I, and hence, hopefully, the audience - would feel very negatively toward them for trying to sway his easily-influenced sister.

It's a central and rather conclusive scene to some of the themes in my book, as you can hopefully see, and I'm so close to finishing the first draft of this novel I can taste it...

Any insight that anyone can give as atheists and writers would be much appreciated!

Thanks, all!

[Ruv Draba]

My suggestion is that this story is not about ideology at all, but relationships, responsibility, fear and prejudice. To see this, imagine that your main character is vegetarian and the pastor's family are carnivores. What if they feed the sister meat and she likes the taste and demands more? Or what if he's a classical musician and the family love rock-and-roll, or an OCD-fastidious housekeeper and the pastor's family are slobs?

The key question here is whether your MC will allow his sister to be an individual with her own life, or whether he wants to make all her major life decisions for her. Is her happiness more or less important than his own prejudices?

If the pastor's family is other than loving, respectful, sincere and welcoming then I don't believe that this story can work: if your MC finds reason to object to their love and care then he gets to avoid the dilemma entirely.

Conversely though, if your story presents this family as loving, respectful, sincere and welcoming, then I doubt that any Christian reader will be offended. Indeed, I can think of many who will be interested to discover whether the author believes that atheistic prejudice is stronger than love.

The question of whether praying in front of a non-believer is offensive is not a question of morality but of custom -- in the same way that displaying meat on a plate, or playing rock-and-roll or not cleaning the house is a matter of custom. People differ strongly over customs all the time, but the moral question is whether the girl is cared for, builds friendships, knows love, and can pursue happiness and meaning as it presents itself to her.

[fullbookjacket]

I'm an atheist, but I really don't enjoy books, music, or movies that portray devout Christians as buffoons and such. Many are, of course, but most are sincere, good people.

Rent "A River Runs Through It," and see how the father, a minister, is portrayed with compassion and intelligence. He teaches his boys fly-fishing and that helps him guide them and teach them about life, possibly more than his religious talks do.

Fiction is conflict. Your MC and your minister should have conflict and then resolution in which they both grow and become better human beings.

[deathwizard]

I have a question about a scene I wish to write, wherein my MC has to "retrieve" his sister who has Down syndrome from a pastor's family who is caring for her while his grandmother, her caretaker, is ill. He simply needs to pick her up at their house and bring her home, but the question of her guardianship - the Grandmother is in danger of passing away - will come up later in the book, and he is very concerned that she not be overly-influenced by - or eventually go to live with - this family.

I'm an atheist, and my MC is as well, or at least he's definitely questioning his grandmother's religious - or really I guess more like agnostic or humanistic (she represents the best side of religion I can bring myself to muster up!) - upbringing of them.

His sister is the easily-influenced character in the situation, of course, and the MC has helped his girlfriend flee a religiously-abusive situation earlier in the novel, so he is clearly concerned for how his sister will absorb the influence of the pastor's family.

My problem with approaching this scene is this: I don't want the novel to "turn people off" who are Christian: more than anything, I want them to have to think through the issues of religion and control and choice, because I was once Christian and I've rejected it for a better way of living, now, where I believe people are more free to live as they would choose to. I see freedom from imposed religion as our most sincere, personal, Democratic freedom.

I want to make sure I portray the Pastor's family in my scene in an open-hearted way that wouldn't turn off some Christian readers who wouldn't otherwise listen to my message, yet still demonstrates that my MC, and I, and hence, hopefully, the audience - would feel very negatively toward them for trying to sway his easily-influenced sister.

It's a central and rather conclusive scene to some of the themes in my book, as you can hopefully see, and I'm so close to finishing the first draft of this novel I can taste it...

Any insight that anyone can give as atheists and writers would be much appreciated!

Thanks, all!

No Christian will ever believe that you've discovered a "better way of living," nor will a Christian "listen to your message."

My suggestion, for what it's worth: Trust your own voice, write what you want to write, and let the chips fall where they may.

[Bartholomew]

No Christian will ever believe that you've discovered a "better way of living," nor will a Christian "listen to your message."


I've met a few open minded Christians, so I really don't think that's the world's fairest generalization.

[deathwizard]

I've met a few open minded Christians, so I really don't think that's the world's fairest generalization.

You've met a Christian who can be talked out of being a Christian by a "better way of living"? I certainly have never met one.

[fullbookjacket]

You've met a Christian who can be talked out of being a Christian by a "better way of living"? I certainly have never met one.

That may not be the best way to describe it. I've never talked anyone out of a cherished belief, during the actual conversation, that is. People are very defensive during conversations. Give 'em enough to think about, however, and they usually do and often change their views after the fact.

Change has to come from within. Otherwise, it's just capitulation.

[deathwizard]

That may not be the best way to describe it. I've never talked anyone out of a cherished belief, during the actual conversation, that is. People are very defensive during conversations. Give 'em enough to think about, however, and they usually do and often change their views after the fact.

Change has to come from within. Otherwise, it's just capitulation.

I have never spoken to a Christian who has ever changed his or her religious views because of anything I might say. And I swear I don't intend this as an insult to Christians. It's just that Christians hold very strong core beliefs. This is not meant as Christian-bashing in any way.

[fullbookjacket]

I have never spoken to a Christian who has ever changed his or her religious views because of anything I might say. And I swear I don't intend this as an insult to Christians. It's just that Christians hold very strong core beliefs. This is not meant as Christian-bashing in any way.

As I said, change comes from within. I used to be Christian, with very strong core beliefs. Now I'm an atheist.

I can tell you that I've engaged Christians in debate (always at their insistence, by the way). They never change positions during the debate. However, a couple of months later, I've heard them reevaluating those strong core beliefs.

[deathwizard]

As I said, change comes from within. I used to be Christian, with very strong core beliefs. Now I'm an atheist.

I can tell you that I've engaged Christians in debate (always at their insistence, by the way). They never change positions during the debate. However, a couple of months later, I've heard them reevaluating those strong core beliefs.

Then you must be a much better debater than I am. :)

[Bartholomew]

You've met a Christian who can be talked out of being a Christian by a "better way of living"? I certainly have never met one.

Yes. Though one might argue then that they weren't truly Christian.

I've taught Christians to meditate, though. And to critically examen their holy book. I'm content that my encounters with Christians have produced stronger Christians, who think more critically. I'm also content that I've shaken more than a few of them from bad lifestyles where God was nothing more than an expletive and something to think about on Christmas.

Christianity <> Bad.

[fullbookjacket]

Then you must be a much better debater than I am. :)

I'm not a particularly good debater, but I know my material well enough to ask the questions that make people think.

[jillbrenna]

Thanks for an engaging discussion! This is all really helpful.

Has anyone read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins? I think the chapter where he compares a religious upbringing for children to child abuse - because they have no choice in the matter & don't have the cognitive skills to make up their minds for themselves about religious questions - is more where I was hoping to go with this scene.

Ruv - I definitely have that character represented, I think - the compassionate believer who brings positive things to the MC's life and doesn't jam religion down one's throat - in his grandmother. I was hoping to portray the blindly-following, beat-you-over-the-head, rope-in-your-little-kids (or sister with the capacity of a child) kind of Christian, and I guess I want to do it in a believable way that makes people kind of shiver - yeah, they shouldn't be shoving that down her throat...

But you have given me a lot to think about - if that becomes his sister's choice, he's got to respect that in a way, and that might become a nice turn to the book.

Anyone who's read Dawkins work or has any more thoughts on that theme - religious education as child abuse?

Again, thanks - this is all very helpful!
- Jillbrenna

[deathwizard]

Thanks for an engaging discussion! This is all really helpful.

Has anyone read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins? I think the chapter where he compares a religious upbringing for children to child abuse - because they have no choice in the matter & don't have the cognitive skills to make up their minds for themselves about religious questions - is more where I was hoping to go with this scene.

Ruv - I definitely have that character represented, I think - the compassionate believer who brings positive things to the MC's life and doesn't jam religion down one's throat - in his grandmother. I was hoping to portray the blindly-following, beat-you-over-the-head, rope-in-your-little-kids (or sister with the capacity of a child) kind of Christian, and I guess I want to do it in a believable way that makes people kind of shiver - yeah, they shouldn't be shoving that down her throat...

But you have given me a lot to think about - if that becomes his sister's choice, he's got to respect that in a way, and that might become a nice turn to the book.

Anyone who's read Dawkins work or has any more thoughts on that theme - religious education as child abuse?

Again, thanks - this is all very helpful!
- Jillbrenna

I thoroughly enjoyed The God Delusion.

[jillbrenna]

Let me also ask, if it's OK, to hear peoples' stories of conversions "back" from Christianity, if that's something anyone's willing to share. One quote that sums mine up is: "What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof." (Christopher Hitchens)

I didn't come to it all at once, but - after taking one small step that would have gone against "God" and everything people were telling me "He" would "want", it was easy to see it all unraveling around me. I can look back now and see I went quickly through several well-defined stages - from a more humanistic thread of Christianity, to agnoticism, to outright atheism where I've landed now, but it was kind of a healing process given what I'd been through - the same kind of, I believe "abusive", sort of an evangelistic process when I was a young person (though thankfully not by my parents!) that I'm trying to represent here in my scene.

Again, I'd be interested to hear peoples' stories, if they're so inclined to represent them here in a few sentences!
Thanks,
Jill.

[fullbookjacket]

Okay, here's my "deconversion" story...

I grew up in the Methodist Church. Okay, not actually, IN the Methodist Church, but you know what I mean. I never really questioned the basics of Christianity in particular or religion in general, but by the time I got to college I certainly believed in other ideas, too, such as the evolution of species.

Fast forward, graduate college, get married, have two kids...I still believed in the basics of Christianity and was an occasional attendee at church. My wife is Catholic and wanted the two daughters to get a solid religious foundation, so we started attending the Catholic Mass on a weekly basis.

After a while, I began to notice that I kept hearing the same 3 or 4 Bible stories over and over again in the sermons. You know, the happy ones, like the Prodigal Son story. The priests never talked about the Great Flood and stuff like that. That got me to thinking; why are they avoiding the teachings that stand on shaky ground. The answer was obvious; the Great Flood, Sodom & Gomorrah, the Prophet Elisha...these stories are flat-out barbaric. To worship a god that would drown the whole planet is to worship a genocidal monster. After that, the whole thing collapsed like a house of cards. You can't pretend one story is true if you claim that the whole of it is divine and inerrant.

I've never looked back. People tell me, "You're just angry at God." Right. How can I be angry at something that doesn't exist?

[Dommo]

I used to be a practicing Lutheran, and my church was already really moderate.

However the more I studied the bible, the more it occurred to me that god was less like a loving father, and more like an abusive step dad.

[deathwizard]

I was a Christian (Presbyterian) until my late teens. But in the end, it wasn't for me. We live in an ancient universe with a trillion galaxies and a trillion-trillion suns. There's no way that the Bible as a literal source makes any sense to me, in that context. And if it's not a literal source, then what is it?

[Higgins]

I was a Christian (Presbyterian) until my late teens. But in the end, it wasn't for me. We live in an ancient universe with a trillion galaxies and a trillion-trillion suns. There's no way that the Bible as a literal source makes any sense to me, in that context. And if it's not a literal source, then what is it?

I think you are being a bit hard on Christianity as a living tradition. Sure, its not very convincing as modern physics, but then parts of the Bible were composed to help people make sense of the world as it was understood about 3000 years ago. If you look at the Bible as a series of
snapshots of attempts at explaining vital issues to a certain audience, then it doesn't look so bad.

The Giants and the Flood for example. The Biblical version of these stories manages to relate them to a cosmology with some mechanism related to individual behavior. Not one we would literally like to adhere to...but one that is not utterly savage either. Clearly it has not been easy for mankind to make any kind of mental progress and the Bible shows how painful some of the steps have been.

[Higgins]

Okay, here's my "deconversion" story...

I grew up in the Methodist Church. Okay, not actually, IN the Methodist Church, but you know what I mean. I never really questioned the basics of Christianity in particular or religion in general, but by the time I got to college I certainly believed in other ideas, too, such as the evolution of species.

Fast forward, graduate college, get married, have two kids...I still believed in the basics of Christianity and was an occasional attendee at church. My wife is Catholic and wanted the two daughters to get a solid religious foundation, so we started attending the Catholic Mass on a weekly basis.

After a while, I began to notice that I kept hearing the same 3 or 4 Bible stories over and over again in the sermons. You know, the happy ones, like the Prodigal Son story. The priests never talked about the Great Flood and stuff like that. That got me to thinking; why are they avoiding the teachings that stand on shaky ground. The answer was obvious; the Great Flood, Sodom & Gomorrah, the Prophet Elisha...these stories are flat-out barbaric. To worship a god that would drown the whole planet is to worship a genocidal monster. After that, the whole thing collapsed like a house of cards. You can't pretend one story is true if you claim that the whole of it is divine and inerrant.

I've never looked back. People tell me, "You're just angry at God." Right. How can I be angry at something that doesn't exist?

I'm reading E. Waugh's Bio (Waugh was a notorious Catholic). It seems one week in Yugoslavia, things were dull and Waugh paid Winston Churchill's son (who was busy being a commando with Waugh) 10 pounds to read the Bible, just to keep him occupied and quiet. Randolf had not read the Bible so
the plan sort of backfired and Randolf Churchill spent the whole week exclaiming "God! God is such a shit!"

[deathwizard]

I think you are being a bit hard on Christianity as a living tradition. Sure, its not very convincing as modern physics, but then parts of the Bible were composed to help people make sense of the world as it was understood about 3000 years ago. If you look at the Bible as a series of
snapshots of attempts at explaining vital issues to a certain audience, then it doesn't look so bad.

The Giants and the Flood for example. The Biblical version of these stories manages to relate them to a cosmology with some mechanism related to individual behavior. Not one we would literally like to adhere to...but one that is not utterly savage either. Clearly it has not been easy for mankind to make any kind of mental progress and the Bible shows how painful some of the steps have been.

I have no problem with Christianity as you so eloquently describe it above. But most of the Christians I run into in Upstate South Carolina would have a lot of problems with what you just said, because they do indeed take every word of the Bible as literal truth.

[Ruv Draba]

Anyone who's read Dawkins work or has any more thoughts on that theme - religious education as child abuse?
I see that view as a bit skewed. All societies -- including societies of atheists -- have myths. All myths contain lies. For instance, I cited these myths over in the Christian writers' forum recently: You can't get pregnant the first time; any citizen can become president; every hard-working person can afford their own home.

From the perspective of human development I believe that it's always appropriate to challenge our myths and when we detect that they're false and doing harm, to alter them. But calling myths 'child abuse' is extreme -- since we all believe in some form of myth or other.

I personally believe that education about religion is very valuable. I don't consider indoctrination into unquestioning acceptance of religious myth (or any myth) to be valuable at all though. But the problem there isn't just religious -- it relates to unquestioning acceptance of nationalistic, gender and racial myths too.

Certainly, as a society we need to contiuously reflect on what mythology is taught in schools and in homes. But narrowing the question to just religious myth looks like hobby-horse xenophobia to me.

[Ruv Draba]

Let me also ask, if it's OK, to hear peoples' stories of conversions "back" from Christianity, if that's something anyone's willing to share.
My Christian education failed to take from an early age. Stories of Jews in robes doing stuff weren't as exciting to me as Arabian Nights, Greek myth or Roman history. Put simply -- the other guys had better imagery and more dramatic stories. Moreover, the morals in Christian myth seemed either obscure or dubious to me.

Then when it came to talking to ministers and priests I just got bad vibes from all of them - a sort of disingenuous smarminess that didn't feel like love or honesty to me. So by the time they tried teaching me how to think, I was already rejecting it because I didn't like the people teaching it.

In late childhood and teens I started to accumulate questions and objections to the mythology and morality -- and virtually none of them were ever answered to my satisfaction. After the questions and objections started to number hundreds rather than a handful, I resolved to myself that every Christian was in some specific ways, barking mad.

Fortunately I've mellowed since then. I now think that most other people are barking mad too. :)

[Higgins]

My Christian education failed to take from an early age. Stories of Jews in robes doing stuff weren't as exciting to me as Arabian Nights, Greek myth or Roman history. Put simply -- the other guys had better imagery and more dramatic stories. Moreover, the morals in Christian myth seemed either obscure or dubious to me.

Then when it came to talking to ministers and priests I just got bad vibes from all of them - a sort of disingenuous smarminess that didn't feel like love or honesty to me. So by the time they tried teaching me how to think, I was already rejecting it because I didn't like the people teaching it.



My experience was more or less the opposite. I was totally atheistic from an absurdly young age. I assumed it was basically impolite to say so and I attempted to do all ritualistic religious things as well as I could and I found most of it quite charming. I went to a religious school (Catholic in fact) and had some interesting dialogs with the more religious nuns. I admitted some ideas that I knew to be heretical and let them argue me out of them. It seemed pointless to say "I don't believe any of this stuff" since that would have given us nothing to talk about...sort of like when people tell you all about a movie you have no intention of paying to see...but you don't want to say so.

Anyway, I've always found religious stuff very entertaining and the fact that it is demonstrably deranged and goofy with sentiment only adds to the entertainment. If you are really bored and feeling blue nothing beats a nice pilgrimage and a few miraculous healings for drama and it is all the more touching and intense if you keep in mind there is no God helping these people -- they are somehow coming in and out of states of illness and health all on their own. Not exactly "healthy" in the strict sense...but very instructive for those who care to get into the flow of the event.

[jillbrenna]

From the perspective of human development I believe that it's always appropriate to challenge our myths and when we detect that they're false and doing harm, to alter them. But calling myths 'child abuse' is extreme -- since we all believe in some form of myth or other.

I personally believe that education about religion is very valuable. I don't consider indoctrination into unquestioning acceptance of religious myth (or any myth) to be valuable at all though. But the problem there isn't just religious -- it relates to unquestioning acceptance of nationalistic, gender and racial myths too.

That's the context in which Dawkins discusses it: not education about religions but indoctrination. So I'm sorry for not making myself more clear, if it seemed my question was about education about religions. It was about indoctrination, and the harm it can do otherwise healthy, inquisitive young people to limit their worldviews in such - yes, thanks for pointing that out! - prejudiced ways. I guess it's just prejudice in a different skin - wolf in sheep's clothing, if you will.

[SevenIsles]

I'm reading E. Waugh's Bio (Waugh was a notorious Catholic). It seems one week in Yugoslavia, things were dull and Waugh paid Winston Churchill's son (who was busy being a commando with Waugh) 10 pounds to read the Bible, just to keep him occupied and quiet. Randolf had not read the Bible so
the plan sort of backfired and Randolf Churchill spent the whole week exclaiming "God! God is such a shit!"

Oh that notorious Catholic Waugh! :D

This episode was delightfully portrayed in his Diaries, so I thought I'd give you all the pleasure of the relevant excerpts:


11 Nov 1944

Thinking the money well spent if it would keep Randolph quiet, Freddy and I have bet him 10 pounds each that he will not read the Bible right through in a fortnight. He has set to work but not as quietly as we hoped. He sits bouncing about on his chair, chortling and saying, 'I say, did you know this came in the Bible "bring down my grey hairs with sorrow to the grave"? Or simply, 'God, isn't God a shit.'
The first of a party of escaped prisoners of war arrived here.

18 Nov 1944

Freddy, having doubled his bet, is now anxious to win it, so that instead of purchasing a few hours silence for my 10 pounds I now have to endure an endless campaign of interruption and banter, both reader and heckler drunk. Light failed for lack of petrol.

22 Nov 1944

The Americans still with us. Randolph got drunk at midday and abandoned his Bible reading. The Americans got drunk at cocktails with the Russians and one was sick on the floor during dinner.


Things in Yugoslavia were hardly dull at this time as you see :D

I recommend Waugh's Diaries to all; not only are they full of insights into the themes of his novels, but there are laugh-out-loud funny bits on almost every page.

[skunkmelon]

I read the God Delusion and it was an interesting book except I kept getting insulted for Christians. I don't like it when I hear someone telling me I'm dumb for not believing in god anymore than I like it when I hear someone else saying I'm dumb if I don't believe in evolution. I think religion is a personal matter and I object to the "pushers" of any faith--whether atheist, wiccan, christian, muslim etc.

As for your scene and your story, if the main character is sympathetic enough, then any opposition would be seen (I believe) as objectionable. You could make the family as sweet and wonderful as you want, but if you're showing how upsetting it is to your MC and how stressful the situation is, then I think you won't have any problem with your reader sympathizing with the antagonists.

When I read a book that is well written, with a really good MC, I'm on that character's side no matter who they are. I suspend belief with relish for a good book! :)

[zornhau]

I read the God Delusion and it was an interesting book except I kept getting insulted for Christians. I don't like it when I hear someone telling me I'm dumb for not believing in god anymore than I like it when I hear someone else saying I'm dumb if I don't believe in evolution. I think religion is a personal matter and I object to the "pushers" of any faith--whether atheist, wiccan, christian, muslim etc.

:)

Snag is, you're saying science is a faith, rather than a method.

[skunkmelon]

Snag is, you're saying science is a faith, rather than a method.


Well, I don't think science is a faith. I'm just saying atheism has the same problems that religions do, (in my mind they're problems) that proponents feel they must protect their beliefs at all costs. Science doesn't lambast religious followers, and certainly not all atheists do, but I think when someone decides to 'be' one path or another they feel it's their life's plan to make sure everyone else agrees.

As related to the question asked of the original poster, bringing in elements of the arguements behind who's right would make his/her (sorry, I can't remember!) story more nuanced and relevant for either side.

:)
Jen

[Manix]

The key question here is whether your MC will allow his sister to be an individual with her own life, or whether he wants to make all her major life decisions for her. Is her happiness more or less important than his own prejudices?



I think Ruv hits the nail on the head. I don't see how it would be possible to portray a family who welcomes the girl with open arms as less than optimal for her wellbeing. But ultimately, wouldn't it be up to the girl to decide for herself (if your MC really wants her to be happy)?

[Ruv Draba]

Well, I don't think science is a faith. I'm just saying atheism has the same problems that religions do, (in my mind they're problems) that proponents feel they must protect their beliefs at all costs.Some religions come with a doctrinal mandate to evangelise; some don't, and some actually come with a prohibition against evangelising.

Atheism isn't a single doctrine but many bodies of thought lumped together, largely for the convenience of theists. Only a few of those bodies of thought consider theism to be either immoral or dangerous. In my personal experience, many atheists are happy to live and let live, many feel under pressure by theists (for historically justified reasons), and only a few consider theism so heinous that it should be actively fought in the public domain.