Ted Dettweiler's Reviews > The Musician's Quest

There is no question that MacDonald used his novels as a vehicle for disseminating his theological views. In so doing, his intentions were likely very different than Dickens, as I suspect was his audience.

My understanding is that MacDonald became disenfranchised with the church as an institution but never lost his sense of calling to the people of the church . . . so that when he relinquished his pastoral post, his novel writing became his new pulpit.

So one could argue that MacDonald was an "artist" in his own rite when you consider him primarily as a theologian and secondarily as a novelist.

I appreciate your review Ted and your intention to read more of his novels. He just so happens to be one of my favourite theologians. He was ahead of his time. I suspect that a number of his theological reviews would not be well accepted in certain evangelical circles if they were carefully considered, including his views on eternal punishment, which border on universalism.

Hi Glen,

I'd like to thank you for introducing me to Goodreads as an alternative social network. You've modelled writing reviews of books to me and I am always reading your reviews even though I am too often guilty of the 21st century sin of 'lurking' (reading without entering into the dialogue by commenting or even at the very least "liking"). When I finish a 900 page tome like David Copperfield (really these were the Victorian era versions of todays Netflix series, published in instalments) my natural tendency would be to not want to do the work of writing a review, but I have learned by your example that the discussion that you can have around a novel or most any kind of book (or movie) can be very valuable and is worth the effort. In fact, I wouldn't really use Goodreads term 'review' for most of what I write up after reading a book. It is usually more about me and how I reacted to the art of the writer. Did it resonate with me? Did I learn anything? And then the cool thing about a social network around books is that I can look at how other people reacted to this book and I can dialogue about something that I know myself having read the same book.

So when I entered into the question about whether MacDonald is preachy or not it was because other reviewers spoke of this issue. I think that when a writer ventures into "telling" rather than "showing" (terms I picked up at a writers conference a long time ago, which I hope I am correctly using in this application) it would be considered that the writer is a lesser artist in the novel craft than the one who can espouse his or her views through the described actions of the characters and the dialogue of the characters. If another reviewer had not raised the issue of whether MacDonald is preachy or not I would not have included that in my "review" because I found the little sermons in The Musician's Quest to be quite edifying (to me).

In my recent reading of Victorian era novelists which has included George Eliot, George MacDonald, William Thackeray and Charles Dickens, it seems to be quite acceptable for the writers of this era to narrate their views overtly in sermonizing asides. George Eliot and George MacDonald made use of this liberty and when you come across a section that is sermonizing it is very clearly that - they don't make any crafty efforts to disguise it. Charles Dickens is a great proponent of his views on child labour, the evils of the courts and many more issues relevant to his times but since he "shows" it - it is integrated into the story - no one accuses Dickens of being preachy. Or perhaps it is for this reason that we label Eliot and MacDonald "preachy" while Dickens escapes this sobriquet: His views on these issues were not universally accepted (there were those who thought him wrong-headed) but in our post-modern world we have moved much closer to Dickens' views being universally accepted. So, if in your craft as a writer you expound your views so effectively that the future world comes to align themselves to those views then, eventually, you will not be called "preachy". Either Dickens was so effective in propounding his views in his art that the world came to accept those views, or he was just good at picking on issues that were on their way out in society. I think I would lean toward the former.

Please don't think by these comments that I would have all Dickens and no MacDonald. There is a prophetic kind of preaching which states "this is right" and which is never accepted by society. This kind of prophetic role is rightly directed at the church (part of that society as a whole). MacDonald does that quite effectively in "The Musician's Quest". Even today, church people are used to the form of preaching. So as long as there is a church, and by this I mean the church universal, George MacDonald will have an audience where his craft is appreciated. I am part of that audience.

In case someone who is simply looking to choose a Victorian era novelist stumbles into this conversation on being preachy, I should clarify that MacDonald's fiction is not all-the-time in sermon mode. The characters are well developed according to the standards of the writing craft. We know Falconer through his actions long before we hear any sermons preached from his life. If you don't appreciate the Victorian era practice of views being narrated to you, skip those sections and you will still have a fully-developed story that is of great value.