An actual line from “The Shack”
You may know about “The Shack,” William P. Young’s self-published and then picked-up novel about a conversation between a grieving father and God. I am reading this book for discussion in the faith community I’m involved with, though it’s not something I’m necessarily looking forward to completing.
This is an actual line [the bracketed, cynical comments are mine]: ” ‘Idiot,’ he [WASPY main character Mackenzie Allen Phillips] grunted, thinking about Tony the mailman; an overly friendly Italian with a big heart but little tact. Why would he ever deliver such a ridiculous [unmarked, unstamped] envelope?” [Hint, I bet it's a letter from God!]
A slovenly Italian named Tony? Are you kidding me? There’s more nuance in Super Mario Brothers. Even if I wasn’t offended as someone who identifies at least partly as Italian-American, I’d still think this was really bad suburban noir. But I’m only on page 17. Perhaps the parts of my brain saying “overwritten” and “show, don’t tell” [I'm more offended by these deficiencies than by the slight at my paisan] will be drawn in by something else. Right now I’m taking notes on the perils of publishing without an editor.
+10.
I was appalled at the writing, the unnecessary “recommendations” (pick three, not 50 recommendations and please don’t expect me to buy the book just because Micheal W Smith liked it…), and the shoddy print job (terrible font choice, horrific white paper- at least in my paperback copy).
After I got past these things, the content was pretty descent… and even though I think it’s worth a read, it’s more because of the intellectual and emotional content rather than the writing. You’re absolutely right when you say “Show don’t Tell.” This book takes very little thought because Young gives away all the symbolism instead of letting us figure it out on our own (…please let me know what you think of this idea once you get done with the scene where Mackenzie goes gardening with the Holy Spirit).
I had similar concessions and I didn’t want to read the book. But, all that aside, once I finished it, I was actually pleased that I had taken the time to read it.
sounds like an interesting piece, i’ve got a quick question though, in part related to my own novel. Do you take the book at face value, think it’s a work of fiction and accept that, or believe that it’s pseudo philosophy / theology and that it’s trying to achieve something that should be left to the real theologians, or does it actually achieve some philosophical / theological arugment / debate / questions? I’ve got some philosophy in my current work and as over confident i can get sometimes, i’m really worried about people laughing at the philosopical arugments posed by it and how i’ve dealt with them.