The Three Es

[Jack Getze]

At a Sisters in Crime mystery symposium this past Saturday, author Shobhan Bantwal called on writers to accomplish "the three Es" with all their work. "Enlighten, educate, and entertain."

Shoban told me she writes women's fiction with lots of suspense, not really crime novels. But what about us? Are we just here to entertain our readers, or do we have an obligation to educate and enlighten?

Excuse me while I go look up the difference...

EDUCATE: give intellectual, moral, and social instruction
ENLIGHTEN: give greater knowledge or understanding

[B.R.Stateham]

For us the emphasis should be on the E for Entertain. I don't want to sound snarky (Jesus, what a descriptive word!) but this world has enough damn books about Enlightening me. Enough already! And ditto for Educating me.

But really, if you think about it, there are damn few authors out there that can truly entertain and capture the imaginations of their readers with a story so well done it puts them in a kind of daze. That's writing. That's what a fiction author should be concentrating on.

If you can fold the other two E's in there . . . . hot tuna! Go for it! But peg the Entertaining 'E' first.

[I. J. Parker]

We've had some balking here on "moral instruction," but I feel strongly about all the Es, and try to accomplish them.

In the case of books I read, I want to find at least some insights into the human condition on the way. I'm not particularly thrilled by pages of technical explanations of how things work or how many types of guns there are and what their differences amount to.

[Jon Loomis]

It wasn't balking, I.J., it was flat out open dissent. Finding insight into the human condition is one thing; the rankest comedies can do that. "Enlightening and educating" is another kettle of fish altogether.

[Dana King]

I think all three Es are of value, but if the book isn't entertaining, the odds are the other two won't get accomplished, either. Anyone looking to accomplish all three would do well to emulate taking junior high-age children to a museum. Don't tell them they're going to learn anything. Convince them they're having fun, and the education and enlightenment will stick to them as they walk through.

[Eric Christopherson]

Part of the reason I write is I enjoy the research, the educating of myself on esoteric topics, and the writing sometimes enlightens me on particular topics, makes me think of humanity and its issues in new ways, and of course I entertain myself as the story unfolds. My favorite novels supply the 3 Es, and while I've read 1E books that only entertain, I can't say I'd read any of them twice, or even be glad I read them once.

[B.R.Stateham]

Dana is dead-center correct. If you don't entertain first, forget doing anything else. There's more books there there are days in our combined lifetimes to read. Wasting time on a book that doesn't entertain first is basically . . drudgery.

But I guess what I'm trying to say is I kinda rebel at the thought that writers are obligated to not only entertain but required to enlighten and educate as well. That's screwy. If that is the case Clive Cussler should never have made it to print. Or Louis L'Amour. Or thousands of other writers.

[I. J. Parker]

You might consider the fact that we do not know what entertains everyone. People have different expectations. Of course, that brings us back to the lowest common denominator if we want to do well at this.

[Jon Loomis]

I know what entertains me; that's as close as I can get. If I'm the lowest common denominator, so be it. I'm with B.R. on this one: I'm not in the business of proselytizing, and if I'm going to educate you I prefer to do it in the classroom. The whole "enlighten and educate" thing seems a bit presumptuous to me.

[Dana King]

I agree. Trying to come up with something that will entertain everyone is futile. I can only try to entertain people who are entertained by the same things I am and hope for the best. Someone who likes cat mysteries will probably think what I write is vile and disgusting. So it goes.

[Eric Christopherson]

I haven't read Cussler, but from what I've heard, I'd be surprised if he didn't educate his readers about various high technologies, especially the maritime related. Someone like L'Amour I imagine educates readers about the past in various ways.

Come to think of it, I would think it must be hard to write a book without at least the 2Es, entertain and educate. A lot of books don't enlighten though.

[Jude Hardin]

I think our only "obligation" is to entertain. Everthing else is gravy. And that goes for any genre, IMO.

[Jon Loomis]

For once we agree, Jude. Sort of; I'm not sure that literary fiction has the same obligation to entertain in the escapist sense of entertainment--but it is obliged to tell a good story.