Well said.

Not only that, Granger’s defenses smack of the “But my [insert minority here] friend said…” arguments.

I second both Wm. and Th. and add this:

I appreciate you stopping by to comment, even if you may think I’m just giving that lip-service; and I’m glad you felt to share Steven Walker’s observations about Spotlight. I do hope to read the book in the not-so-distant future, but I’ve been forestalled by other pressing projects.

Which leads me to this: I hope you’ll keep in mind for any future discussion here that 1), as Th. points out, this post was written before Spotlight came out and 2), ergo, that it wasn’t written in response to or as a review of Spotlight. Though there is some extrapolation about the book based on the articles you’ve published about Twilight and Mormonism online, my observations are a response to those online postings. I’ve tried to be responsible in my observations by being clear about what I was responding to and I would hope that, as a matter of courtesy and professionalism, you would offer the same in return by giving the participants here at AMV the benefit of the doubt. I’m confident we’ll do the same, though I can really only speak for myself. 

Curiously, I was just talking about the Krakauer book yesterday with some fellow Mormons. I couldn’t find anyone who had cared enough about it to buy a copy, read more than a few pages, or even remember it. I suppose there must be a Mormon out there somewhere who thinks that book is a big deal, but I’ve still yet to meet one. And I know hunnerds and hunnerds of Mormons.

If it’ll make Mr Granger feel better, he might take heart that I’ve recommended his book to some high-school students. And, back to Steven Walker’s comment, it strikes me as absurd to suggest that any probing, no matter how deep, could be construed as the final word on anything.

My goodness. If the first person who wrote about Shakespeare had been 100% right — just think of all the English professors out of jobs!

Just as a general observation though, as a result of his comments, Granger’s book has gone from one I am skeptical of but want to read, to one that I’m prone to dismiss as a likely polemic. Tone tone tone. That’s the secret to healthy internet discourse.

I do hope, Mr Granger, that you will accept William’s offer to engage with us rather than dismiss us.

But since this conversation basically was over four months before you showed up, it’ll be interesting to see if it’s possible to get it started again.

If you view literary discussion and debate (which I would note includes a range of responses here and elsewhere) as a war to be won (backpedaling, crew, detractors, mavens), then I’m afraid that doesn’t interest me much (at the very least — others are welcome to chime in so long as they give heed to the warning above).

If you are interested in actual conversation then how about we start with your response to Tyler’s suggestion that “imprinting as a manifestation of the premortal romance” is a much stronger approach to sussing out Meyer’s attitudes and motivations (unconscious or otherwise) than Krakauer’s book?

I cannot expect an apology for your crew’s dismissive and unprofessional attacks on the know-nothing Gentile, but I did expect better than to be called “snarky.” My apologies for revealing my disappointment about the discussion on your website in a sarcastic aside about my detractors at AMV, no scare-quotes necessary, yourself among them.

One point worth making is that this discussion happened before the book was released.

And: I have only read the first Twilight novel and a few of John’s blog posts so I personally don’t feel like I have much of a bone in this particular literary conversation other than that some of it has taken place here on my turf.

“The professor who had the most influence on me was Steven Walker, mostly because he was just insanely brilliant. The way his mind worked was fascinating, and it helped me look at the literature we studied in so many new ways.”

I hope we can accept this BYU English professor’s thoughts on Spotlight as having more authority than ‘Tyler’ or ‘JettBoy’ or the Oxford student studying Aramaic (!) on the subject of Mormonism, literature, and Twilight. He, at least, has a real grasp of LDS theology, history, and literature, has read the book, and understands literary alchemy and its ties to Mormon beliefs.

Prof. Walker read Spotlight and wrote this note as his endorsement:

“John Granger’s Spotlight probes deeply into Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight series by means of an Eliade lens: ‘The reason people read is for some experience transcending their lives as egos.’ The reason we read Meyer so passionately, the reason we enter so ‘fully into her stories,’ Granger shows us, is the compelling mythic implications of her narratives, the religious ‘depths and heights’ they share with some of the best English literature. Granger persuades me that Meyer’s religious thought is so crucial to her fiction that to read it without consideration of the theology is to miss much of the point. As a believing Mormon like Meyer, I can testify it’s no light matter to succeed as this critical view does in deepening a Christian’s reading of his own theology. If you’re interested in how much religion can matter in modern fiction, you’ll be interested in Spotlight.”

Professor Steve Walker

Author of The Power of Tolkien’s Prose

Do you think Prof. Walker would (a) endorse a book that bashed Mormonism or that was written without careful research into LDS history and thinking, or (b) that didn’t contribute significantly to the conversation about Twilight? I don’t. But that, of course, could be just another symptom of my desire to smuggle Mormon bashing arguments under the cover of literary criticism.