"The Shack" -- a Good Reason for the Public Library

Not to pound something until it is dead, but yesterday I remembered that I had two other issues with "The Shack".

The entire time I read the "The Shack", I felt like I was being played, manipulated. The reason why? "The Missy Project".

First of all, Missy is not a real person. So, to have a "Missy Project" is ridiculous. It sounds like her picture should be on the back of a milk carton. She doesn't exist. Hence, part of my disdain for the book. As I said before: when God is still alive and at work in this world in miraculous ways, why would we settle for made up stories about Him?

I really do like fiction (good fiction), so my issue is not that. I even like good redemptive fiction like Les Miserable or Ben Hur. I like God in my fiction. But I like my God stories to be true, since they can be.

The other issue with the "Missy Project" is that it is a sham. Yes, a sham. Movie rights have been sold for books that have sold far fewer copies than "The Shack". So, whether or not it becomes a movie is not directly tied to how many books are sold.

The beginning of the blurb about the "Missy Project" said, "A group of us who have been touched by The Shack" or something to that effect -- yes, that group would be the publisher and the author. The more books you buy the more money they get. "The Missy Project" struck me as a deceptive way to advertise and manipulate people into buying more copies of their book. It subtly tells you that in order to spread the Gospel "buy my book".

It reminded me of when I was in college and this guy who a barely knew told me that I HAD to vote for him for class president. Not because he would do a good job, but because he was a Christian. He had the audacity to try to use my faith to manipulate my will for his purposes. I felt this the entire time I read "The Shack" because of the "Missy Project".

If "The Shack" is truly such a great book that a movie maker wants it to become a movie, then let it stand on it's own merit.

I realize that I'm riding a fine line here, since my book will be released this summer, however, I would never start an "Anna Project" or anything so manipulative or cheap. There's a difference between promoting a book or a message than trying to manipulate people into generating income for you.

Another issue of honesty, I found on the publishers website. "A funny thing happened on the way to helping a friend with his new book. We couldn’t find a publisher who would treat it the way we felt The Shack needed to be treated to find its audience. Christian publishers thought it too controversial and wanted to dull its edgy side so as not to risk alienating their core audience. Secular publishers shied away because they felt the content put it clearly in the ‘Christian’ marketplace."

First of all, if a secular publisher had thought that it would sell, then they would have bought it. I highly doubt that Harper Collins would have turned it down on the basis of it's spirituality. In fact, many secular companies have either an "inspirational" market, or, as for fiction will just publish anything. If you read a lot you know that.

Secondly, there are Christian publishers that gladly publish controversial books. Specifically, I've seen some pretty funky stuff coming from Thomas Nelson as of late.

My issue here isn't with the fact that it was tossed out of other publishing houses. My issue is that they feel the need to make up reasons. Many a publisher has passed up a great manuscript because they don't know what they're doing. I'm sure Harper Collins would have loved the revenue from "The Shack". The issue was, probably, nobody thought it was a good book.

So, friends of the author started a publishing company. In essence, "The Shack" was self-published, maybe friend-published. So, BE HONEST ABOUT IT.

All of this just led me to feel like I read through one big marketing scheme as I read. Promoting a new publishing company started by the author's friends, trying to be convinced I should advertise for free for them. Trying to be convinced that I should help them try to make this a movie.

The entire time I read this book, I felt defensive, like I was being manipulated. It made for a frustrating read, in part because of the author/publishers behavior in marketing. It's hard for me to feel like I can be touched by God when I feel like the person writing the book is trying to get into my wallet as much as possible.


Perhaps it's a character flaw on my part, but I feel as though I should be able to read a book and the message, without interference by either the author or the publisher, should be able to get through.

So, "The Shack" -- if you want to read it borrow it from a friend or get it from the library!

More on the Bibles

According to Zondervan Publishers, the Average American owns nine Bibles and is actively in the market for more, while the average third-world village does not own a single Bible.



So, why would Zondervan be so concerned with us buying more Bibles -- unless of course it was so we could donate them. In that case wouldn't the $7 Bibles be better so we could donate more?

Hmmm... good question I might say....


Also, Look who now owns beliefnet, a website that is riddled with new age garbage (like Chicken Soup for th Soul) and other spirituality and has a bit of Biblical Christianity mixed in. I think of it as Oprah meets Barney Fife and Tim LaHaye.

Who do we want feeding our spiritual lives?

The B- I - B - L -E! That's the Book for ... Greater Profits?

The original scribes of the Bible may have been inspired by God. Their modern-day successors? They find inspiration in vacuum cleaners, polka-dot bedspreads and a slick, hot-pink Juicy Couture purse.

This all may sound a bit irreverent. But consider it from the Bible publisher's point of view: How do you sell a really old book that 91% of households already have? -- LA Times


_____________________________________________________________________

This may sound a bit irreverent, but are these guys nuts?

Apparently, the Bible marketers from Zondervan, have been sitting in what they call their "Bible Bunker" figuring out how to make God's word more marketable. They look at the latest trends in appliances, accessories and such and then transfer those styles into faux leather, and, voila, a new marketable Bible.

It certainly is thrilling to be a Christian in this country.

According to the L.A. Times, it is still possible to buy a standard, plain black Bible for a mere $7, but, then if that's all that people did, where would the Christian publishing industry be? Certainly not at the $770million dollar sales that Zondervan took in last year.

Of course, I'm willing to bet that the same number of people would have Bibles, the profit just wouldn't be so great. However, if your purpose is just to sell as many Bibles as possible, then its not the number of people who own (and read) Bibles that matter, it's the number of Bibles sold. Obviously, we, or perhaps they, are much better off when we buy the $35 stylized Bibles they sell.

The really funny thing is that there are people comparing these guys to Martin Luther and William Tyndale. They are making the Bible more accessible.

WOW! And, I thought that Tyndale and Luther made the Bible more accessible through translation, language and doctrine rather than by adding a snazzy cover or marketing to a niche crowd (like surfers...).

But, these bastions of inclusion, in an effort to make God's word "more accessible" have come up with many new Bibles including, (and no, I'm not kidding about this) a Bible for Sorority Rush. So, as you send your young daughter off to the life of drinking, sex and who-knows-what-else, they can carry a copy of the Bible in their sorority's colors -- but, apparently only if you're a member of Alpha Kappa Alpha.


"There is a line, because it's God's word," VP Scharp (Vice President of Bible Sales for Zondervan) told the LA Times. But then later he confessed, "It's hard to draw the line in any one place and say, 'We're never going to cross that." Apparently so.


The really crazy, or maybe possibly sad/funny or befuddling, thing is that these guys think that it's their marketing that's selling the Bible. It almost appears that they think God's Word would die out if they didn't market it in colors that co-ordinated with Jenni's new outfit or cool enough to be in the arms of a cool band member.

How much would you be willing to bet that the vast majority of Zondervan's sales are to people who already own a Bible? Why would you have to up the ante with some new marketing scheme unless you are selling Bibles to people who don't need another?

Are we really trusting these people with the precious Word of God?

But, in the words of Zondervan's own, I'll close my epistle of foolishness:

"If you put chocolate coating on an Oreo, it's a different cookie, and you ought to be able to charge more," Caminiti argues. "The packaging has to scream that this is something really new: First time! Fudge-dipped! Chocolate-coated!"

Todd Niemeyer, vice president of sales, chuckles and murmurs, "Smoke and mirrors."

Have Faith, It's All In Here and Other Christmas Tidings

Since all of the Christian Christmas Catalogues have arrived, one might think that I am out of blog-fodder until the after Christmas sales.

One would be wrong to think that. I have another venue, one of my favorites for diversifying my thinking: Christian Radio.

I was driving down the street this afternoon, and learned about the latest in Bible Technology. (For further study of new Bibles, see my blog entry: Amish Romance Novels and Other Great Perks When You Become a Christian.)

A company entitled Amazing Faith has produced a micro film, apparently encased in a very sepulchral coverlet, that contains the entire Bible. It is the size of a credit card -- but can only be used for heavenly purchases. I know that was a really bad joke.

Anyway, this handy dandy Bible is totally and completely portable, and almost readable. The caveat to the portability, though, is the need to have a microscope with you.

According to www.amazingfaith.com, "The Itty Bitty Bible™ can be read word for word using a standard compound microscope but... have faith, it's all in there." The Itty Bitty Bible can be yours for a mere $10 (plus shipping and handling).


Now, I'm really not sure what's worse: The concept behind the Itty Bitty Bible, or the sum total of what I heard on the radio today. See, if you want, you can pay the $10 and have an Itty Bitty Bible donated to one of our troops in Iraq. That way they can all carry the word of God with them, even though they can't read it (unless they also carry a microscope).

The DJ did point out the the idea was not to get the troops to actually read the Bible, but just to "have the word of God in their Hands."

Have we really reduced the Word of God to that? Have we really made it some kind of amulet or good-luck trinket? I mean, this DJ didn't even blink at the idea that this might be, well.... a little useless. I don't know about anyone else out there, but I have to say that I can sit and hold a Bible all day, but I unless I read it, it isn't going to do much for me or any other person in my life.


Well, if you're still looking for the perfect gift for someone, my intensive research on the "Itty Bitty Bible" led me to a blog called, "Say What?" where I also learned about a product called "The Green Prosperity Handkerchief". Now, the great thing here is that it's free! You can give your loved ones the gift of prosperity and it won't cost you a cent! According to Don Stewart, creator of the Faith Handkerchief, "Thousands of people around the world have used this Biblical point of contact prayer cloth to receive abundant blessings of financial prosperity."

However, he cautions you should read the instructions before using. That's wise, because using it just might not involve blowing your nose, as you would intuitively think it would. Or perhaps it is only for times when your snot is green like the cloth. You just can't be too careful.

I was thinking, though, that a good service project might be to buy 10,000 of these handkerchiefs and give them out in India. Just enough to really stimulate their economy. Then we can move on to another 3rd world nation. After we wipe out world poverty, then we might want to give some to our government so that we can get rid of the national debt. Anyone out there want to organize that?

This also reminded my husband of a perennial favorite of ours: the Jesus Pan. The face of Jesus is molded right into the pan. Therefore, it shows up on anything you cook in the pan. The add says it all, "Imagine serving heavenly hotcakes at the next church breakfast." I can only imagine.


All this talk of Christmas gifts got me reminiscing of Christmas years past. Last year's Christmas is just a blur to me because we returned from Ukraine only several days before. However, I vividly remember the Christmas before. It was the Christmas that a large family advocacy group launched their campaign to keep Christmas Christmas, rather than just the "holiday season." I watched the campaign with some amusement because I really couldn't believe that someone didn't have any better battles to fight than tying to keep a commercial based holiday associated with a gospel that it has nothing to do with. Boy that was a long and confusing sentence.

Anyway, I got the (what seemed like) thousands of forwarded emails about what stores I was supposed to boycott, and all the forwarded emails about the ones that complied with the family advocacy group's demands. But the most amusing part of it was at the end of the season, when I was forwarded the final letter of that season's campaign.

After being a thorn in the side of many retailers, and getting several of them to change their advertising the family advocacy group decided that Christmas was getting too commercial (no kidding!) and that members should make an effort not to buy so much next Christmas.

So, let me get this straight. You antagonize the retailers about their advertising and merchandise, boycott them, finally negotiate and get what you want, and then you withdraw your support from the them? Wow.

Well, that spirit of Christmas is still alive and well. The other day, my Mom (who most certainly must have realized that she was sending me blog fodder!) sent me a link to a rather disturbing video. Don't worry, it's not obscene (unless you consider getting the song stuck in your head as obscene).

I don't even know where to start with this, except that my first thought was that there was no "gentleness and respect" that Peter calls for in I Peter, unless of course, I misread "jabs and sarcasm" as "gentleness and respect." The song is called, "It's Called Christmas with a Capital C" and appears to be a comeback at the movement to remove Christ from the Christmas celebration. Of course, if we were going to be really honest with ourselves we'd admit that Christ came out of our national celebration of Christmas long ago. I, personally, have spent the past 11 years of parenting trying to make sure Christ is put back into what is really a secular, commercial holiday (albeit a fun one).

The song has one of the "Go Fish" members or someone telling really corny, and, in my opinion, rude jokes. The first one being, "Merry Christmas Mr. Lowenstien!" -- referring to the many years that the standard holiday greeting was "Merry Christmas" despite whom you were talking to. The thing is, did we all say "Merry Christmas" because everyone celebrated Christmas? No, we said "Merry Christmas" to everyone because, I think, we were only mixing with people like us, and, as the dominate block of Americans, only catering to ourselves.

Guess what? Things have changed, and most of us know and interact with people of all beliefs and cultural celebrations. So perhaps saying "Happy Holidays" is simply a way of showing respect?

Another conundrum from the video is how we are supposed to be "taking Christmas back" but then he goes on and on about how "Merry Christmas" was never about a religion but about something cultural. He called it, "something good for us as a nation." Well, there he said it himself! Christmas, on a national level, was never about Christ!


And, while I do believe that Christ intimidates people, but not in the way they sing of, I also know that if someone was telling me that I had to tell everybody, "Happy Ramadan" because that's what people should do, it would tick me off and make me not want to listen.

So, while I'm still trying to figure out who in the world is trying to stop them from saying Merry Christmas, I have to ponder what something like this would teach children -- who are Go Fish's primary audience.


Yes, we have a right to say "Merry Christmas", and, yes, anything that is good in the country is from the influence from Christianity. However, I fail to see why that would mean that I want to force people who aren't Christians to fit into my mold. I think Christ is more concerned with reconciling those people to Him than He is with them saying "Merry Christmas."

So, without further ado.... Happy Holidays!