Hmmm. I have fundamentally christian roots but do not adhere to any religious schools of thought anymore. That being said, I don't specifically write christian or non christian literature. Currently the tale I'm weaving does involve christianity, due to the setting and time, but it also involves a lot of paganism. I have little to no comprehension of paganism so I've set out studying to figure some of it out. I believe whether to involve religious concepts or not is dependent upon a lot of things. The setting, the characters' main belief systems and the era of the events. If you can avoid religion in all three go for it, but historical writings will more than likely always involve one religion or another.
First, there is absolutely nothing inherently preachy about a MC who is not an atheist. The perception of preachiness is simply a subjective reaction to the idea involved. Second, if a writer can't get his idea across without being preachy, then it's not the idea that's at fault but the writer himself who lacks the skill necessary to tell a story properly. Third, atheist evolutionists push their atheistic world view all the time in very subtle story-telling ways which could very well be perceived as preaching. In fact, if the same tongue-in-cheek approach that atheist authors use were employed by a non-atheists, the atheist readers would immediately perceive it as preaching. So there is a tilted table or double standard in effect here. Finally, the films 2001 and 2010 Space Oddysee were both pro-intelligent design. Were they preachy? Of course not. Which goes to show that it's not the subject but how skillfully the subject is handled that determines how it comes across.
Also, I think it is possible to have a story that is, "preachy," and it actually still be a good read. Example? I loved the book the Jungle, but I also have to say that it's one of the most preachy novels I've ever read. Yet, I still like it better than the Golden Compass series for example. Why? It's just a very well written story. Now, it does become annoyingly preachy at the end, but that's because we are being told the moral message, instead of shown it. That's the key, a good moral will be shown, not told. For the first two thirds of the Jungle, it's shown. The author puts the family through the problems he's preaching against. The last part though, he just has someone read off speeches basically. This is not only incredibly preachy, but is TELLING us the message. Anyway, my point is that subtlety isn't the only way to successfully teach a moral. It's also possible to do it through great writing style, as Upton Sinclair did through interesting choices(like comparing a Fertilizer Plant to Dante's Hell.)
I totally agree with Killer300. I would like to ad that it's impossible to write an interesting story without taking a stand either pro or con in relation to some issue. Even if we attempt a middle ground then we are taking a stand for the middle ground. For example the films involving the macho characters portrayed by Clint Eastwood convey the idea that a real men settle things violently, and have a low regard for human life. The film Aliens sends the message that women can be as capable or even more capable than men in extremely dangerous and stressful situations. This is emphasized even more by having the Hudson Character acting cowardly and whining at the outset. The Damian film which has Christians savagely kicked around by the Devil and his cohorts can be viewed as anti-Christian Satanic propaganda . The message is that it just doesn't pay to be on God's side and that God doesn't care one way or the other. Even cartoons carry moral messages such as it's OK to do unto others before they do unto you. So the moral lesson factor is inescapably there by default and it's the way that we handle it, as the previous poster said, that tilts it either into the preachy or non-preachy category.
I'm a Christian, but in my main series that I write, I only have one character who is an outspoken believer. Another is an atheist. That's all that has come up. If you put a gun to my head, I could point out who else believes what, but it hasn't come up at all.
I have a story written with the theme of religion, although it's not revealed until the end, in which the whole concept is basically laughed at. I think if you avoid writing about things that you feel strongly about, you have no business writing at all. Unless of course you're going to be the next Michael Connelly, whose books are all basically the same thing repeated now, with no real meaning or theme. I have strong views on this sort of thing, and I believe if you avoid writing about things like this, you are probably a coward in reality as well.
I heard Simon Morden and R S Downie talking about this at the weekend. Both are Christians, both consider that the story has to come first. The main protagonist in Morden's Metrozone trilogy is a sweary Russian atheist with poor impulse control and a shady background. There's no tidy moral point, just a good story. At least the warrior nun is quite moral, and when the inquisition turns up they behave in a conventionally Christian way. His previous book, The Lost Art had a Christian monk as a main protagonist, but he was a very scary and obsessive character, and not at all the sort of person anybody would want to spend any time around. It's all about the story.
It really depends on what I'm writing. Sometimes I feel it's pertinent for the reader to be aware of my character's religion. What I'm writing currently there's really no mention of the characters' religion(s). In past things there have been. It depends on the story for me. The one I'm working on now I don't feel it's important for it to be known one way or the other. It's not the focus of the story.
I agree. I also say this: If your character is of a religion you do not know very well, research it. Research it until it's as familiar to you as possible. Last thing you want to do is to accidentally piss off people* of that character's faith because you had him/her do something they wouldn't do. (Like having a Jewish character eating pork when that's an unclean food to the Jewish religion or have him/her celebrating Hannukah at the wrong date with all the wrong details.) * Some, not all. I don't want to seem like I'm generalizing.
I think I may do it subconsciously. I'm not religious, but was raised as a Hindu. After years of rebellion I am coming to appreciate the stories behind the various rituals and Gods/goddesses. Especially considering how very old some of them are. I, personally, don't understand why people shy away from religion. I just see it as a facet of a character's many attributes. For example A MC dabbles in a form of Satanism that is heavily involved in the occult due to loosing faith in God. Or perhaps a deeply religious girl has a tragedy happen and it strengthens her faith. Or maybe just a character is raised Jewish. It doesn't need to consume them, or even define them. Religion just happens. It's only offensive if you don't do your homework and portray a respected deity in a rather unfavorable light or completely insult the deity. For example The Goddess "Kali" is often portrayed by Western media as a "demon" or "Early incarnation of a vampire." (<I saw this in a documentary looking at the evolution of Vampire lore.) Some Hindu people take great offense to this because you've just portrayed an extremely sacred deity as a demon/vampire. Religion needn't be "controversial." You can have religious characters or not. Or mixed.
Presumably because of how she killed Raktabija? Of course, she wasn't feeding on the blood, just stopping it falling on the ground. Depends on how you define vampire, doesn't it? Maybe the problem isn't portraying Kali as a vampire, it's seeing vampire as necessarily bad.
