NOTE: The following is a revised version of an article originally published on Medium, where I’ve published a number of writing advice pieces.
How many times have you been drawn into a gripping plot with engaging characters, only to experience a nagging suspicion that the author is wagging their finger at you?
Fiction readers have a sixth sense that detects when they are being preached at. I’ve grown increasingly wary and intolerant of this, even if I agree with the message. Whether an author’s axe-grinding is social, political, or religious in nature, I still react with a weary eye-roll. Perhaps I’m jaded, but even the youngest of readers can’t stand being condescended to, being told what they ought to think, for their own good, on a particular issue.
Littering a novel with characters that act as author mouthpieces, delivering calls to action or “come to Jesus” moments, is a recipe for provoking the opposite reaction in the reader. For example, an earnest anti-war message delivered with consciously po-faced seriousness can become so numbing that the most committed of pacifists will get the urge to start fighting, just to spite the author. Again, it doesn’t matter if you agree with the author’s sentiment. You will feel cheated out of a good story, as though you’ve listened to a long sermon instead.
Before the inevitable cries of protest, rest assured I am not wilfully ignoring the many great novels with powerful, convincing messages. However, the real classics strive first and foremost to be a damn good story, well told. Yes, there are social issues and concerns highlighted in classics like Oliver Twist (Victorian poverty) and To Kill a Mockingbird (racism), but at no point does the reader feel as though they are being preached at. So how did Charles Dickens and Harper Lee achieve their goal?
I believe the answer is simple: they wanted to tell a good story and set aside any conscious agenda. Charles Dickens didn’t write a novel about poverty, he wrote an adventure story about an orphan against a backdrop of poverty. Harper Lee didn’t write a cry against racial prejudice, she wrote a coming-of-age drama about loss of innocence, and a courtroom drama set inside a racist culture. Therefore, what was important to them became inherent in the material.
Disregard your agenda
It might sound counter-intuitive, but attempting to insert a message into your story leads to a novel that is, at best, unconvincing. Designing a narrative around a message results in something even worse: propaganda. As someone who grew up surrounded by evangelical Christian culture, I read many laughably insincere Christian novels, with unconvincing plots about ludicrously sinful protagonists who go on to get saved at evangelistic rallies.
If writing a story about political tyranny, racial injustice, or sexual inequality, whether in a contemporary or historic setting, the temptation is to deliver your strongly held beliefs in an on-the-nose fashion. Resist this temptation. Instead of seeing a cause you care about fighting for, see a story you care about telling well. One of the worst pieces of advice I see doing the rounds in literary circles is to only write when you have something to say. Utter nonsense. Instead of writing to deliver a message to the masses, write to entertain the masses. Simply tell a good story with no conscious agenda whatsoever.
Write in a genre you love
Having decided to write a story with no agenda, the next thing to decide is genre. Choose a genre you love, not a genre that is currently popular, or by self-consciously striving to write ‘literary fiction’. I’ve always considered that an absurd term, because all fiction is literary. Rather than denoting a genre, it instead fences off a section of literature as somehow more elite or important. Snobbery about genre fiction persists, but don’t let that put you off. Choose your genre, and write the compelling, page-turning tale that you would love to read.
Build convincing forces of antagonism
Eschewing a consciously inserted message frees you up to properly explore the antagonist’s perspective, rather than paying it mere lip service. A convincing narrative must contain opposing views to those you are no longer trying to preach, whether social, political, or religious. All good writing emphasises conflict, and as such it pays to build up genuine, convincing arguments for those characters, organisations, political groups, or other forces opposing the protagonist in your novel. However, because you are the author, the interests of your worldview will be inherent in the text, without needing to be stated in dialogue or inner monologue that read like unconvincing, clumsy, patronising editorial asides.
Finally… add humour
An underrated but hugely effective way of ensuring your novel doesn’t sound like a sermon is to add humour wherever possible, regardless of how dark the subject matter might be. Laughter is a part of life and makes everything feel more natural. Even the bleakest of situations contain moments of gallows humour.
Conclusion
If approached this way, when reading back through your novel, you’ll be surprised just how your deeply held beliefs shine, but without any cringe factor. When others read it, you’ll also be surprised at the strongly held beliefs and ideas that worked their way in, without you even realising. I’ve had readers discern many of my strong views — about oppressive religious groups and abuse of power, for example — when reading novels I had intended purely as good entertainment.
The most powerful and important message will reach a receptive audience if it is entertainingly presented. That is why novelists should first and foremost determine not to preach their views, but to write a great story.
Simon Dillon Books 