Can you define “fluffy” or “sappy” LDS fiction? Is there a market for this kind of fiction?
Like beauty, fluffy and sappy are found in the eyes of the beholder.
I define fluffy as a pleasant story with no real meat. The opposite of fluffy would be what we call literary fiction, which is intended to change the life of the reader, or at the very least, make the reader think. Fluffy fiction is usually a fast read, intended as entertainment and generally quickly forgotten. Fluff occurs on a sliding scale, with a sweet romance being on one end and a fast-paced thriller on the other. Most currently published LDS fiction is fluffy. Yes, there’s a market for it. Fluffy fiction is not a derogatory term in my vocabulary. It fills a need for many readers.
Sappy, however, is a negative (imho). Sappy fiction manipulates the emotions of the reader in a heavy-handed way. It tells us how we’re supposed to feel, when we’re supposed to cry, rather than letting us find our on way through the story. It feels contrived. Is there a market for sap? There shouldn’t be, but apparently there is because I still find it more often than I’d like to in this market.