Every once in a while, I like to ask for “reader response” and get your interaction. A little while ago, I asked for your five favorite novels. The response was good and I’ve added a couple of books to my “to read” pile as a result. This time, I want to know which five non-fiction books have most influenced you the most? Since this is an openly Conservative Christian blog, I’m going to assume that everyone will list the Bible as one of the selections, so I’m going to say: In addition to the Bible, what five non-fiction books have most influenced you? In no particular order, here’s my list:

• Knowing God by J.I. Packer
• Desiring God by John Piper
• The Transformation of American Religion by Alan Wolfe
• Total Truth by Nancy Pearcey
• Crunchy Cons by Rod Dreher

Just briefly examining this list, Desiring God and Knowing God have been tremendously influential in forcing me to realize that any study of theology must result in deeper affections for God and urge us on to holy living. There is a direct correlation between biblical faith and knowledge. As our knowledge of God increases, our faith in Him ought to directly increase as well.

The last three books might all fall into the broad “worldview” category. Alan Wolfe, though not a believer, has some insightful comments regarding the way American culture interacts with religion, particularly bringing a marketing influence to bear on it. Total Truth and Crunchy Cons both serve as stark reminders that our faith must affect all of our lives and must be active and lived if we are ever to truly affect the culture around us.

I’m looking forward to your books! Please share.

Les Bollinger of PA lists:

• The Pleasures of God by John Piper
• The Pursuit of God by A.W. Tozer
• The Race Set Before Us by Thomas Schreiner and Ardel Caneday
• But I Say Unto You by John Reisinger
• The Educated Imagination by Northrup Frye

Justin Clark of Charleston, SC lists:

• Freedom at Midnight by Larry Collins & Dominique Lapierre
• Narrative Of Missionary Enterprises in the South Sea Islands by John Williams
• Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem
• Holiness by J.C. Ryle
• Europe Through the Back Door by Rick Stevens

Sean Dennis of Louisville, KY lists:

• A Theology of the New Testament by G. E. Ladd
• Created In God’s Image by Anthony Hoekema
• Desiring God by John Piper
• Instruments in the Redeemer’s Hands by Paul David Tripp
• Paul, Apostle of God’s Glory in Christ by Thomas Schreiner

Eddie Exposito of Slidell, LA lists:

• Evidence That Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell
• When People Are Big and God is Small by Ed Welch
• Slouching Towards Gomorrah by Robert Bork
• The Christian Ministry by Charles Bridges
• Always Ready by Greg Bahnsen

Christine Myers of Akron, OH lists:

• Celebration of Discipline by Richard Foster
• The Church Musician by Paul Westermeyer
• Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis
• Desiring God by John Piper
• The Celebration Hymnal

Wade Myers of Peoria, AZ lists:

• Future Grace by John Piper
• Desiring God by John Piper
• The Pursuit of God by A.W. Tozer
• The Love of God by John MacArthur
• The Irresistible Revolution by Shane Claiborne

Michael Sawilowsky of Fort Worth, TX lists:

• On God and Christ by Gregory of Nanzius
• Girl Meets God by Lauren Winner
• Brothers, We Are NOT Professionals by John Piper
• Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger by Ron Sider
• A Grief Observed by C.S. Lewis

Rhett Smith of Pasadena, CA lists:

• The Cost of Discipleship by Dietrich Bonhoffer
• In the Name of Jesus by Henri Nouwen
• Purity of Heart Is To Will One Thing by Soren Kierkegaard
• The Hermeneutical Spiral by Grant Osborne
• Let Your Life Speak: Listening To The Voice of Vocation by Parker Palmer

Kevin of Plainview, TX lists:

• The Vision and the Vow by Peter Greig
• Celebration of Discipline by Richard Foster
• The Pursuit of God by A.W. Tozer
• Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis
• Holy Wild by Mark Buchanan

Will Turner of NY lists:

• The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God by John Frame
• Thoughts on Family Worship by J.W. Alexander
• Spiritual Depression by D. Martin Lloyd-Jones
• Confessions by Augustine
• Autobiography of John G. Paton by John G. Paton

Aaron Wilson of Little Rock, AK lists:

• A Passion For God by Ray Ortlund Jr.
• Ashamed of the Gospel by John MacArthur
• Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God by J.I. Packer
• The Pursuit of Holiness by Jerry Bridges
• Knowing God by J.I. Packer

Continuing with some thoughts on “Crunchy Cons” by Rod Dreher, he makes an interesting statement in Chapter Four (”Home”). Each chapter deals with some aspect of how the “crunchy” philosophy and approach differs with that of mainstream conservatism. For example, chapter two deals with “Consumerism” and chapter three with “Food.” Chapter four deals with homes and what makes a house a home.

To be honest, growing up, I never thought much about the aesthetics of housing. I now realize that I didn’t think about it because I didn’t know it existed. I grew up in Phoenix, AZ. I don’t know if you’ve ever been to Phoenix, but it’s a great place to visit. Aside from some very run-down housing or some very up-scale neighborhoods, everything else is a “cookie-cutter” suburb. Every few houses looks the same because they are the same.

I didn’t really understand what I was missing until we moved to Louisville, KY to attend seminary. Louisville has character. Old buildings are preserved, old houses are homes and history is cherished. In Phoenix, when a building gets old, they tear it down and put a new one on top of it. The only thing is that it doesn’t really matter because neither the old building nor the new have any sort of individuality to them.

Dreher argues that in reality:

“Aesthetics matter, and anyone who has been to the beautiful cities and towns of Europe, and has seen how older buildings of greatly differing styles and ambitions exist harmoniously with each other and their surroundings, knows it.”

Elsewhere, speaking of older houses, Dreher remarks that one ought to

“Drive through a historic district of any town or city of reasonable size, and even if the houses there are down-at-the-heels from neglect, you will pick out beauty and harmony there that you cannot find in newer subdivisions, with houses that cost vastly more. Even shotgun houses built for the working class have more charm and dignity than contemporary McMansions.”

This is an issue which I have often thought about since moving from Phoenix to Louisville, what Jonathan Hale called the “rampant charmlessness of our built environment.” The more I think about it, the more I do begin to see the connection between the cookie-cutter subdivisions and contemporary conservatism which elevates economic concerns to the ultimate concern.

Mainstream conservatives are interested in Aesthetics only inso much as they’re cheap and practical. Hence the over-supply of “big box stores” that look just like what they’re called, big boxes. Boxes are simple, boxes are cost-effective and boxes are cheaper to produce. Who needs character and beauty when the bottom line is the dollar and not the senses?

Dreher remarks that

“Whenever I clash with conservatives about home architecture, and complain about the ugliness of sprawl, I often get called an “elitist” (which is a funny epithet for a conservative to deploy, but never mind), and told that these are merely questions of taste.”

Dreher comes back by noting,

“Yet I doubt these folks would say there is no important difference between hearing Bach sung in a Baroque jewel box church in Germany, and some happy-clappy 1970’s hymn burbled in one of those crapped-out Our Lady of Pizza Hut churches slapped together in suburbia during the Nixon presidency.”

Rarely do we realize how truly holistic we are. There is a connection between Economics and Aesthetics. When economic concerns are elevated as the only judging factor, then aesthetic value is bound to plummet. The houses all look the same in Phoenix because that’s what’s most cost-effective to build and buy. People aren’t interested in charm because they’ve been convinced that money is the bottom line.

The reality is that the “big business” complaints against the Republican Party are often quite true. When land developers are given free reign, when sprawl is uncontained, when old neighborhoods are torn down, it’s often the Republicans driving the dozer under the banne of “free market”. Though I am staunchly pro-life, I am economically conservative, I believe in smaller government, I also care about the envionment, I don’t believe that the free market system is our only saving hope and I am convinced that aesthetics matter and that family is the foundation of any society. Who do I vote for when neither party’s mainstream base seems to actually take real-life seriously?

As some of the comments to yesterday’s post revealed, the two-party system has brought much meaningful dialogue to a stand-still. We now have people withholding votes as a way of voting. The problem with this is that it’s hard to tell the “contientious abstainers” from the merely complacent. Until there’s a solution, I’ll go look at books, marvel at Frank Lloyd Wright and try to understand the disconnect between real conservative values and mainstream conservative life.

• Read Crunchy Cons by Rod Dreher

A recent online article argued: “Why Da Vinci Is Better as Book.” Four of the reasons listed revolve around the comical line: “In print, you can imagine Tom _______ instead of Tom Hanks.” Moving from Tom Cruise to Tom Selleck, to Tom Arnold, and Tom Green, the author is apparently not a Tom Hanks fan. Regardless, the article begs the question of whether or not the Da Vinci Code is a good book. What I find telling is that the article begins by stating, “No, I didn’t read “The Da Vinci Code.” Yes, I admit it, my literary habits, if you can call them that, tend to run more toward comic books.” I’m not sure this is a man who is fit to say that any story is better as book than film.

I finally read the book this weekend. It’s been in my “to read” pile for some time and as the furor grew, I kept thinking “I need to actually read it,” so I did. Others have addressed the key complaints: Jesus’ divinity was imposed, He married Mary Magdalene and fathered, etc. These have been dealt with, so I won’t address them. Rather, I’d like to think about other issues raised by this phenomenon. First, the blurring between fact and fiction, the possibility that the Christian repsonse has actually helped the book’s sales and influence and last, I’d like to ask the question, “is it a good book?” (is it a good story, are the characters sufficiently developed, are words used well, does the author develop concrete imagery, those types of questions).

First, the Da Vinci Code book and movie are part of a growing number of works blurring the line between fact and fiction. We’ve seen this trend gain tremendous headway particularly on television with the rise of “reality TV.” I’ll admit, I do watch Survivorman, Deadliest Catch and Dirty Jobs when I get a chance. But these shows present “reality” as entertainment. When the concept has been transferred to the page, we find authors presenting fiction as reality. The most notable recent example of this has probably been that of James Frey.

Frey’s “memoir” A Million Little Pieces fell into just that as allegations of fabrication and plagiarism emerged. After much scrutiny, according to Wikipedia, “Frey acknowledged that he either embellished or outright fabricated many elements of the book.” That’s a real problem for a book claiming to be a memoir. Many here will rightly point out that the Da Vinci Code is not a memoir and openly claims to be fiction, therefore any concerns in this area are unfounded. I wish they were.

Dan Brown cleverly plays the same game as James Frey, but Brown gets away with it because he claims the book is fiction. However, complicating matters is the fact that Brown feels compelled to open the book with a list of “facts.” These include pointing out that the orgianizations chronicled in the book (Priory of Sion and Opus Dei) are real, which therefore implies that the claims made by these groups in the book are also factual. These “claims of fact” are not part of the story, but preface it and therefore, color many’s perception of all that follows.

Second, I think that it is entirely possible that the Christian response to the book has actually boosted its sales (and thus its possible influence) tremendously. As I’ll discuss in a moment, it’s not a good book in the same way Tale of Two Cities is a good book. When literary critics gaze back, they will not see the Da Vinci Code. When cultural historians do the same, they just might see it. It is entirely possible that Brown chose his content specifically because of the “uproar” factor. Though we can not know that for certain, it was indeed a bold move.

Churches have devoted entire seminars and/or Sundays to the book. Christian authors have spilled much ink, Christian commentators have filled many airwaves, Christian magazines have devoted their cover stories to it. What better press could an author hope for? I’ve written elsewhere that about the possibility of boycotts. While I’m not sure that boycotts are the answer, I’m also becoming convinced that the “Christian response” has actually boosted the sales of a sub-par book with controversial content.

Had we simply and quietly addressed some of the key claims without denouncing and demonizing the book and author, I wonder if things might not have gone a bit differently. Instead, we see photos of book burnings and that’s just the type of image that sells and that stirs someone to become curious about a book they may have otherwise ignored.

Last, I want to briefly consider the literary merits of the book itself. I’ve made no secret thus far that I don’t consider it to be well-written. The story concept is fairly compelling, containing murder, conspiracy, chases, everything the modern man needs to be entertained. But this ultimately becomes part of the problem. It is not about literature, it’s about entertainment.

Modern fiction (for the most part) has tried to adapt itself to the television culture. The result has been fast-paced books with lots of action and short (sometimes very short) chapters that serve not to develop characters, but to move the plot. Da Vinci Code fits the bill perfectly. The characters are developed by their actions rather than dialoge or monologue. The result is that there is no connection other than that we know Langdon is supposed to be the “good guy” and that’s who we’re supposed to root for; there is no depth and therefore, the only drive for Langdon is that he is a “historian” who cares about the truth.

The language itself is sparse, but not in the sense that makes Camus’ The Stranger so compelling. Instead, it’s a “just the facts ma’am” approach that is not interested in developing concrete images or characters, just moving the plot, focusing on many shallow action words, trying to force suspense rather than letting it develop naturally. Overall, I would have to say that it’s poorly written but cleverly marketed and that’s a shame that such a project receives such success.

After having read the book for myself, I’m not surprised at its success. The characters are shallow, the action is fast-paced, the emotions are few, the plot is predictable and it is chock-full of controversy; just what every “average American” desires, an easy-to-read shallow book saying that belief in Christ is unfounded! I’d be surprised if it didn’t sell well.

It seems odd to me that besides the overly obvious (and necessary to address) issues raised by the book, I’ve not read any reviews of its poor artistic merits. It’s interesting that Christians, even in their response to something like this, continue to believe that the message overshadows the medium. Don’t get me wrong, the fallacies presented in Dan Brown’s “work” must be addressed, but this is not even a book of which I could say “I disagree with what he said but he said it well,” and I’ve not heard any Christians point out how poorly written it really is. i pray that we may come to hold everything up to the excellencies of Christ (who is God); even our literary notions.

For those of you who have read the book, I’d love your thoughts, on the content and presentation.

• Read The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown.

One of the upsides to my recent surgery (hey, I’m trying to think positively, aliright!) has been that I’ve been flat on my back for a couple of days. In between pain-pill fogs, I’ve been able to catch up on a bit of reading; not nearly what I had hoped, but good nonetheless. On Monday I finished Let the Trumpet Sound: A Life of Martin Luther King, Jr. and yesterday Imagine: A Vision For Christians in the Arts by Steve Turner.

Reading Turner’s book was an interesting experience. It was interesting because I agreed with so much of what he has to say, but also because he articulated some of the very points that I have been struggling through, particularly reading Eyes Wide Open by William Romanowski.

Over a series of posts, I have wrestled through many of the issues that Turner so clearly communicates. I often try to limit the amount of material quoted in a single post, but since I’ve struggled to communicate much of what Tuner communicates much more clearly, I simply want to give some quotes from his book, interspersed with the few and far between thoughts that I have.

Turner begins by name-dropping his time spent at L’Abri, which I’m sure I would do as well. Regardless, Turner notes that one of the issues he was confronted with while in Switzerland was that, instead of categorizing “all culture as either Christian or non-Christian, spiritual or fleshly,” he was encouraged to “look at works individually.” Turner elaborates that the true criteria for culture became, “Rather than asking, Is this artist saved? ask, Is this piece of work technically excellent? Is it a valid expression of the artist’s view of the world? Are form and content well integrated? Is truth communicated?”

This is a far cry from the “sacred/secular” distinction most of us are taught to bring to bear on culture. Yet, Turner laments that it is not only average Christians who are unprepared to think about the arts, it is also often the “Christian” artists themselves. Turner notes that “By making truth the sole criterion, Christians had often diminished the importance of human endeavor in the arts, and in doing this had deprived themselves of a wealth of cultural experience.” The result, too often is that “Because the work that bore the name Christian was often poor in quality and naive in understanding, Christianity by implication seemed insipid and uninspiring.”

Picking up on themes I’ve wrestled with, Turner laments that “One of the great hindrances to the development of biblically informed mainstream art has been the perception that Christians should make “Christian art” and that “Christian art” is always explicitly religious.” He concludes that “Christian art” in this sense, is usually either an aid to worship or a means of evangelism.” Turner notes that “CCM” (Contemporary Christian Music) is “the only musical category recognized by the record industry that is defined entirely by lyrical content.” The Blues, Country, Jazz, Rock, Classical, all other musical styles are just that: musical styles while CCM is alone concerned with the message.
Countering this traditional approach, Turner argues, “I don’t believe every artist who is a Christian should produce art that is a paraphrased sermon.” In fact, Turner argues, when “Christians think of the arts as something that can be used to win the world to Christ, they create an unrealistic expectation of the arts and put unfair pressure on artists.”

The result of the move towards art as progaganda is, as Turner notes, that “Christian songwriters are encouraged to ignore the ordinary things of life because they don’t provide the opportunity to witness. The result is that many have no grounds upon which to relate to “Christian music” because “Christian music” isn’t actually about real-life and we end up losing the very witnessign opportunity we so treasured.

In response to all of this, Turner notes that “C.S. Lewis once said that he believed in God like he believed in the sun: “Not because I can see Him, but because by Him I can see evrything else.” Turner concludes that “It is possible to create work saturated with gospel insights without spelling out the plan of salvation just as it is possible to demonstrate the joys of a loving marriage without showing off your wedding photographs.” Summarizing here, Turner quotes T. Bone Burnett, who in an interview with the L.A. Weekly said, “If Jesus is the Light of the World, there are two kinds of songs you can write. You can write songs about the light, or you can write songs about what you can see from the light.”

Finally suggesting a way to reconcile both the intake and creation of the arts (particularly music), Turner offers a “five circle” approach. He says, “In my set of circles, the outer ring is made up of art that doesn’t suggest any obvious worldview.” Turner continues, “The next circle contains work that is an expression of our Christian faith because it dignifies human life and introduces a sense of awe.” Moving on, Turner argues that “The third ring contains those things that carry an imprint of clear Bible teaching but which we know are not uniquely Christian.” He says that the “fourth circle in gets closer to the heart of the Gospel,” and “It is in the center circle that unique Christian gospel lies.”

One of the underlying assumptions behind Turner’s “circles” is that artists will be given opportunity more than a single song to lay out the material. In other words, it takes considerable material to most powerfully connect with the human experience at an artistic and instrinsic level and move into the Gospel. The move towards marketing, even within Christian circles means that everything must be packed into one song, which is unrealistic for anyone.

Though there is much more to consider in Turner’s book, I simply wanted to throw some of these things out for your consideration before I have to take another pain pill! More than anything, I’m comforted to read material like Turner’s, not because I agree with it, but because it is a reminder that the Gospel truly is for all of life, including our imaginations and creativity. We are stewards and we ought to invest well. May we heed the the concerns of Turner, Romanowski and others, so that we may truly “soar beyond the stars.”

• Read Imagine: A Vision For Christians in the Arts by Steve Turner.
• Read Eyes Wide Open: Looking For God in Popular Culture by William Romanowski.
• Read my post Who Says What’s Christian Music?
• Read my post Ark Culture.
• Read my post The Decreasing Discernment of the Dollar.

Help! Mom! Hollywood’s in my Hamper! by Katharine DeBrecht. Illustrated by Jim Hummel. (Los Angeles, World Ahead Publishing, 2006)
Hardback, $15.95, Children’s Book.

Katharine DeBrecht is described as “a mother of three, a free-lance newspaper reporter who graduated cum laude from Saint Mary’s College in Notre Dame.” It is also said that ìshe also served as South Carolinaís co-caption of “Security Moms for Bush.” DeBrechtís role as a mother and her conservative political involvement lay the perfect groundwork for, what else, a blatantly conservative children’s book!

DeBrecht has set about to counter the avalanche of overtly liberal books targeted at children, lampooning Hollywold in the process. Her tale centers around two sisters, “Janie and Sam” who were “like most good girls,” and “watched their favorite TV show, Stars Know Best, because ìthey loved watching all the glamorous stars on TV and often thought how fun it would be to dress and act like them.” In other words, we are to take Janie and Sam as average, pre-teen girls with one foot in reality and the other gigging through Hollywood dreams.

Janie and Sam are saving money to buy brand new bikes, the X400 by taking babysitting jobs. After each babysitting job, the girls recount their day, succumbing to giggles. A their giggles rise, a rumble comes from the closet to reveal a parade of different celebrities emerging from the closet telling them how dull their lives are, how ìlast yearî their clothes are and that the girls need to buy their products and listen to them, because, as they each croon, “I’m a STAR which makes me an EXPERT on everything.”

Through the increasing influence of these “stars,” the girls end up spending their money not on bicycles, but on clown-pants, they end up wearing flower pots on their heads, doused with onion perfume, sniffing their toes and wearing “butter boots,” only to find that the calls for babysitting jobs screech to a halt, forcing the girls to realize “Just because theyíre famous doesn’t mean we have to do all the strange things they do or spend all of our money trying to look like them.”

Using not-so-subtle illustrations, DeBrecht parades caricatures of Daisy Fuentes, Madonna, Barbara Streisand, Hillary Clinton, and others, focusing on Hollywodís tendency toward activism and disdain for traditional values. Each of the stars displays a shocking disdain for the very fans who provide them with not only their financial successes, but also the very platforms which they come to take for granted.

While Help! Mom! Hollywood’s in My Hamper! is promoted as a childrenís book with some eye-catching colorful illustrations, it is a bit wordy for the younger children to whom it seems targeted. If anything, it comes across as more of a novelty offering for conservative adults. Blurbs from Rush Limbaugh and National Review seem to lend weight to the concern that the book is only mildly aimed at children who will certainly not understand many of the implicit criticisms.

Nevertheless, the book does draw attention to some disturbing trends, and for that alone it must be recommended. First, the obvious tendency of movie stars presenting themselves as somehow existing in a “decision-maker” realm and we ought to listen to them simply because they might attract attention. We see this mockingly pointed out with the refrain, “I am a STAR and therefore an EXPERT.” This certainly is a real tendency, and one which any “average” person has certainly witnessed, whether it be ìstarsî trying to make peace trips or support political platforms. Though the book uses such implausible statements as “radish earrings” and “onion perfume,” this is nevertheless a real tendency.

The second disturbing trend highlighted by the book is that of targeting children in ideological battles meant for adults. We’ve seen this with the influx of pro-homosexual/lesbian books targeted at children and we are, even if somewhat absurdly reminded that parents must be ever vigilant. The very fact that DeBrecht has written such a book is a reminder to us all that the battle for the future is often fought with our children.

• Buy Help! Mom! Hollywood’s In My Hamper.

Sorry, I recently experienced technical difficulties with this post, so I had to replace all of the content. Anyways, here is the compiled lists of everyone’s (so far) submissions for their top five novels originally prompted by this post. I will keep updating as long as people want to keep submitting lists. I certainly enjoy browsing other people’s lists, especially knowing that mine is always subject to change! So without further ado, yours, mine and ours (current and subject to change) five favorite novels:

Shawn Brenning of Granbury, TX lists:

• Pilgrim’s Progress byJohn Bunyan
• The Chronicles of Narnia byC.S. Lewis
• 1984 byGeorge Orwell
• The Lord of the Rings byJ.R.R. Tolkien
• Safely Home byRandy Alcorn

Sean Dennis of Louisville, KY lists:

• A Farewell to Arms by E. Hemingway
• The Lords of Discipline by P. Conroy
• Slaughterhouse-Five by K. Vonnegut
• Out of a Silent Planet by C.S. Lewis
• All the King’s Men by R.P. Warren

Tami Ellison of Florida writes:

• A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens
• Les Miserables by Victor Hugo
• Stepping Heavenward by Elizabeth Prentiss
• Uncle Tom’s Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe
• Jewel by Brett Lott

Now it looks more like this:

• The Very Hungry Catepillar by Eric Carle
• Corduroy by Don Freeman
• Goodnight Gorilla
• Mother Goose Rhymes
• The Pokey Little Puppy

Aaron Kellar of Phoenix, AZ lists:

• The Catcher in the Rye by Salinger
• The Pearl by Steinbeck
• Lord of the Flies by Golding
• The Giver by Lowry
• The Alchemist by Coelho

Wade Myers of Peoria, AZ lists:

• A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens
• The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas
• 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne
• The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis
• Frankenstein by Mary Shelley

Amanda Ottaway from Denver lists:

• The Circle Trilogy by Ted Dekker (i’m counting this as a single novel)
• In Cold Blood by Truman Capote
• Bamboo and Lace by Lori Wick
• The Lord of the Rings Trilogy by Tolkien (again, I count this as a single novel)
• Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card

Rhett Smith of the great state of CA lists:

• Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoyevsky
• My Name is Asher Lev by Chaim Potok
• Glittering Images by Susan Howatch
• The Stranger by Albert Camus
• The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis

Brent Jeffrey Thomas lists:

• Quo Vadis by Henryk Sienkiewicz
• Les Miserables by Victor Hugo
• Dune by Frank Herbert
• Lord of the Rings by Tolkien
• How Green Was My Valley by Richard Llewellyn

Brent R. Thomas of Glen Rose, TX lists:

• The Stranger by Albert Camus
• The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand
• A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving
• Moby Dick by Herman Melville
• Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck

Kristi Thomas of Glen Rose, TX lists:

• Redeeming Love by Francine Rivers
• The Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis
• Atonement Child by Francine Rivers
• The Scarlet Thread by Francine Rivers
• Leota’s Garden by Francine Rivers

Dan Trabue of Louisvile, KY lists:

• Fidelity by Wendell Berry
• Frankenstein by Mary Shelley
• A River Runs Through It by Norman Maclea
• Mark Twain’s Short Stories
• Narnia series by CS Lewis

Rhett recently left a question that I’d like to both answer and pass on. One of the things I try to do here periodically is ask for reader participation (see the “Five Flawless Ones” and the “Year-End Review of 2005” lists).

Rhett’s question was this: “if you had to tell me five novels that I should read…what would they be…totally side note…but I was just curious what your top five novels were…not in any category..but the five you would take on a deserted island.”

I’d like to pass this question on to you as well. Tell me your top five novels. Please note, this does say novels, so we’ll all just take it for granted that the Bible would be one of the top five books, but that’s not the question! The question is novels, please share your top five. Please feel free to leave them in the comments here and I’ll add them to the post as they are collected.

My (current and subject to change) top five novels (in no particular order):

• The Stranger by Albert Camus
• The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand
• A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving
• Moby Dick by Herman Melville
• Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck

Looking back over this list, I realized that there is a common theme running throughout about the nature of man (and that most are fairly recent works). The Stranger and The Fountainhead both deal extensively with the doctrine and the depth of depravity though neither author would claim to be dealing in biblical doctrines. Moby Dick and Grapes of Wrath also deal with depravity and the human heart, but from different angles, examining the hearts of man in both everyday and extraordinary circumstances. A Prayer For Owen Meany is the only book here that explicitly mentions any biblical concepts (though Rand is clear that her book formulates her religious philosophy of “man worship”) and interestingly deals with the concept of God’s sovereignty/man’s responsibility.

I very much wanted to include the stories of Flannery O’Connor and Eudora Welty, but collections don’t technically count as novels. I encourage you to read fiction, especially if you regularly preach and deal with words. Fiction challenges us to apply our doctrine to life, it helps us to see things from different angles, but it also challenges us to use words well. Good fiction is a window into the soul, both of the writer, but also of the reader.

What about you?

Aaron Kellar of Phoenix, AZ lists:

• The Catcher in the Rye by Salinger
• The Pearl by Steinbeck
• Lord of the Flies by Golding
• The Giver by Lowry
• The Alchemist by Coelho

Rhett Smith of the great state of CA lists:

• Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoyevsky
• My Name is Asher Lev by Chaim Potok
• Glittering Images by Susan Howatch
• The Stranger by Albert Camus
• The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis

Shawn Brenning of Glen Rose, TX lists:

• Pilgrim’s Progress-John Bunyan
• The Chronicles of Narnia-C.S. Lewis
• 1984-George Orwell
• The Lord of the Rings-J.R.R. Tolkien
• Safely Home-Randy Alcorn

Amanda Ottaway from Denver lists:

• The Circle Trilogy by Ted Dekker (i’m counting this as a single novel)
• In Cold Blood by Truman Capote
• Bamboo and Lace by Lori Wick
• The Lord of the Rings Trilogy by Tolkien (again, I count this as a single novel)
• Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card

Brent Jeffrey Thomas lists:

• Quo Vadis by Henryk Sienkiewicz
• Les Miserables by Victor Hugo
• Dune by Frank Herbert
• Lord of the Rings by Tolkien
• How Green Was My Valley by Richard Llewellyn

Wade Myers of Peoria, AZ lists:

• A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens
• The Count of Monte Cristo by Alexandre Dumas
• 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea by Jules Verne
• The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis
• Frankenstein by Mary Shelley

As much as I love music, I also love reading (and listening to music while reading, but that’s besides the point, isn’t it?). In my various meanderings through blogdom, one of the things that I’ve come across that has intriqued me is the idea of “blogging for books” and one of the essential resources seems to be (at least within the circles I travel) Mind and Media.

Subtitled “Publicity With Faith,” Mind & Media serves as a sort of liaison between publishers, authors and readers, using bloggers as both their workers and promoters. It’s really ingenious! Bloggers tend to be ver literate, often posting book reviews and recommendations on their own; why not harness that energy? That’s exactly what Mind and Media has set out to do.

As you might have guessed, I am pleased to announce my affiliation with Mind & Media. My first box of free books came and I’m looking forward to many more. If you blog, I’d strongly encourage you to consider affiliating with them. The requirements are fairly straightfoward:

1. Link to Mind & Media with a special graphic I have designed for Reviewers only. Or place our Blog ad on your site the duration of the time you are reviewing books, dvds etc.
2. You review the book and the whole time you are reviewing the book you have a link with the graphic I will provide on your blog for 60 days. This must be in a prominent place for everyone to see, not at the bottom of your blog where no one can see it.
3. Tell others about Mind & Media, by writing at least one post, so we can share the books and other products, because we have more than enough for everyone!
4. You must put that the book you received was given to you from Mind & Media as a gift from the Publisher who donated the books for reviewers on your blog as a disclaimer. (This is a request of the publisher.)
5. Have a basic knowledge of HTML code so you can easily add graphics or links to your site.
6. There is NO LIMIT to the products you can receive FREE as long as you review the material and place the appropriate codes or logos on your site.
7. On average we give you about 4-6 weeks to complete your reviews.
8. We also use the Amazon associates program to promote the products, and you can either use our codes for Mind & Media and allow the sales to be given to Mind & Media, or you can open your own Amazon account and track your sales for us.

In addition, you must be able to prove that you have monthly traffic of at least 1,000 visitors. For more information or to begin your partnership, visit them at http://www.blogforbooks.com.