The arrival of the transcontinental railroad to Utah in 1869 marked the end of a period of relative isolation for the LDS Church. It also came just at the end of a period of almost no Mormon publishing in Utah and the United States.

This inactive period was nearly total. Before 1870 the LDS Church itself published only the Deseret News in Salt Lake City (starting in 1850) and a few flyers and administrative items[1]. The most innovative material produced during this time was George Q. Cannon’s Juvenile Instructor and the Deseret Alphabet, the attempt to reform English spelling and make it easier for the flood of LDS immigrants. And the Deseret Alphabet materials were mostly printed in New York City[2].

The railroad did not bring better communication — that had already come by way of the Pony Express (in 1860) and the Telegraph (18 months later, in 1861). Instead, the railroad brought easier and cheaper transportation of freight and people, both of which were generally welcomed by the church and its members. However, these gains also came with challenges.

For publishing, the railroad increased the size of the available audience in Utah, and made it easier to get an audience outside of Utah. It also made it easier to get additional printing equipment, and increased the number of local competitors. The railroad also made it easier for newspapers, magazines and books to find their way to Utah.

It was this latter effect that seemed to trouble the Church most, as the incoming books included the cheap novels that had found an audience throughout the United States and elsewhere in the world. Even before the railroad reached Utah and throughout Brigham Young’s administration Church leaders regularly advised members against reading fiction. Apostle George Q. Cannon argued in 1866 that “Works of fiction, novels, tales and light reading of that description ought not to be read by young people. They are not food for your mind…”[3] But many Church members ignored the advice, and how to provide worthwhile materials for those members was behind any publishing efforts at the time.

Auxiliary Magazines

In January 1866, Apostle Cannon started the Juvenile Instructor, in response to the burgeoning Sunday School movement that followed Richard Ballantyne’s 1849 organization of a Sunday School in Salt Lake’s Fourteenth Ward. The new magazine consisted of catechisms on the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; musical compositions; illustrations; stories; editorial teachings; and other aids to gospel instruction. It was the first magazine for children published in the United States west of the Mississippi River[4]. The following year Cannon was called to preside over the newly-formed Deseret Sunday School Union, the Church-wide organization formed to standardize and support the movement, and held that position until his death in 1901[5].

Despite Cannon’s position as an Apostle, and as a member of the First Presidency starting in 1873, the Juvenile Instructor remained independent of both the Church and the Deseret Sunday School Union until Cannon sold the publication to the Union a year before his death[6]. The magazine remained financially independent primarily from subscriptions, but also because it sold additional  materials to support teachers. In many ways the Juvenile Instructor marked the beginning of independent Mormon publishing–publishers and publications owned by members of the Church but generally supporting LDS Church efforts.

Because the Juvenile Instructor became the voice of he Sunday School, over time its success led those in the other auxiliary organizations of the LDS Church to create magazines to support those efforts. In 1872 a group of women loosely associated with the Relief Society (organized again in 1866) started the Women’s Exponent, which became known as the voice of LDS women. While those that ran the Exponent were also leaders fo the Relief Society, the magazine was financially independent, and grew to have considerable influence in Utah politics[7].

After the Church formed the Young Ladies Mutual Improvement Association (YLMIA) in 1869 and the Young Men’s Mutual Improvement Association (YMMIA) in 1875, Junius F. Wells, the inaugural head of the YMMIA, saw a need for a magazine to support the needs of both youth organizations, and founded The Contributor in 1879 and in 1889 Susa Young Gates founded the Young Women’s Journal to support the YLMIA separately from the YMMIA. Like the previous magazines both of these were privately owned and financially independent[8].

‘Faith Promoting’ Books

Despite the similarities among these auxiliary magazines, the Juvenile Instructor did one thing that the others did not: it published books. Perhaps in response to the flood of incoming publications brought by the railroad, Cannon saw the need for books aimed at the edification and entertainment of Church members, rather than the missionary and doctrinal exposition that drove most previous Mormon works. After completing two stints as editor of the Deseret News, about 1879 Cannon started assembling a multi-volume Faith Promoting Series meant to support the Sunday School program. The series included excerpts from missionary journals, including his own missionary journal, that of Wilford Woodruff and that of Heber C. Kimball, biographical materials, historical items, and Cannon’s Life of Nephi[9].

Once available, the books were sold from the Juvenile Instructor’s office, along with many other materials useful for teaching Sunday School. Some of these items were also published by the Juvenile Instructor — a Deseret Sunday School First Reader, Catechism cards, pamphlets on gospel subjects, etc. And other books followed also, including Cannon’s own Life of Joseph Smith, Charles W. Penrose’s Mormon Doctrine, plain and simple and Orson F. Whitney’s Life of Heber C. Kimball[10]. By the 1890s, the Juvenile Instructor’s office was a thriving bookstore, albeit one that focused on materials for Sunday School teachers[11].

Meanwhile, after serving as editor of the Deseret News starting in 1867 and throughout much of the 1870s, George Q. Cannon must have known about the demand for commercial printing services. While commercial printers existed in large cities, in most small cities the local newspaper was the principle, and often the only, printer in town. So those desiring to print a flyer, notice, card, pamphlet, book or even a periodical would often approach the local newspaper to get their work printed. The relationship between a printer, like the Deseret News, and its customer isn’t always clear from the printed item. In some cases, the printer is just a printer, and the actual publisher is the printer’s customer, often a self-publishing author. In other cases, the printer is actually the publisher[12].

Exactly what the difference was between the Deseret News and George Q. Cannon’s operation isn’t clear. Cannon apparently used the Deseret News’ printing press for his publications, at least initially. And items printed there might be listed as published by the Deseret News or by George Q. Cannon, and even the same book might indicate it was published by the Deseret News one year, and by Cannon another. Adding to the confusion, the distinction between the Juvenile Instructor and George Q. Cannon and Sons was also murky, with the latter sometimes refered to as an office of the former. In the 1880s, this was probably complicated by anti-polygamy laws, which sought to confiscate materials owned by the LDS Church. This influenced Church members to keep Church materials in their personal names instead of in the name of the Church.

By 1869 Cannon was already filling some of the need for commercial printing by printing official journals and notices of the territorial government. In 1870 he published a reprint of John Jacques’ Catechism for children (originally published in England), followed by a hymnal, Sacred Hymns and Spiritual Songs, in 1871[13]. However, except for these early publications, Cannon’s name doesn’t appear as the publisher on books until the 1890s (discussed next week). Instead, Cannon concentrated on publishing under the Juvenile Instructor name, and starting in the 1870s the Deseret News appears to have published or printed most of the materials needed by the Church (including new editions of the scriptures and missionary works like Pratt’s A Voice of Warning), and much of the self-published and other independently published Mormon materials[14].

Only in the late 1870s did new works finally appear, such as George Reynold’s The Book of Abraham (1879) and John Taylor’s Mediation and the Atonement (1882). The Deseret News Press also published the Biography and family record of Lorenzo Snow by Eliza R Snow, Franklin D. Richards’ Compendium of the Doctrines of the Gospel, and John Nicholson’s Martyrdom of Joseph Standing. By the end of the 1880s, despite the restrictions from anti-polygamy efforts, LDS publishing efforts had reached a level that exceeded that in the Nauvoo period[15].

[2] Schindler, Hal. The Deseret Alphabet. Utah Orthography, Although Ingenious, Does Not Succeed. Mormons Felt Need For Own Language. Salt Lake Tribune, May 29, 1994, p. D1. Available at http://historytogo.utah.gov/salt_lake_tribune/in_another_time/052994.html

[3] Cannon, George Q. Juvenile Instructor, 15 August 1866.

[4] Poelman, B. Lloyd. Sunday School in Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Macmillan, 1992, pp. 1424-1427. and Allred, Ruel A. Juvenile Instructor in Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Macmillan, 1992, p. 777. Text is available online at http://www.lib.byu.edu/Macmillan/.

[5] Poelman, B. Lloyd. Sunday School in Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Macmillan, 1992, pp. 1424-1427. Text is available online at http://www.lib.byu.edu/Macmillan/.

[6] Allred, Ruel A. Juvenile Instructor in Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Macmillan, 1992, p. 777. Text is available online at http://www.lib.byu.edu/Macmillan/.

[7] Thomas, Shirley W. Woman’s Exponent in Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Macmillan, 1992, p. 1571. Text is available online at http://www.lib.byu.edu/Macmillan/.

[8] Kelly, Petrea Gillespie. Contributor in Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Macmillan, 1992, p. 320. and Kelly, Petrea Gillespie. Young Woman’s Journal in Encyclopedia of Mormonism. Macmillan, 1992, pp. 1615-1616. Text is available online at http://www.lib.byu.edu/Macmillan/.

[9] My own analysis of data drawn from Flake, Mormon Bibliography, 1830-1930. This database can be found online at (http://lib.byu.edu/dlib/mormon_bib/).

[10] My own analysis of data drawn from Flake, Mormon Bibliography, 1830-1930. This database can be found online at (http://lib.byu.edu/dlib/mormon_bib/).

[11] Knowles, Eleanor. “Deseret Book Company, 125 Years of Inspiration, Information, and Ideas.” Deseret Book, 1991

[12] In practical terms, a publisher is someone who takes editorial responsibility and financial risk for a published work. A printer, in contrast, creates multiple copies of an original, usually through mechanical means, and almost always for a fee. But these roles aren’t always clear in the published work, with the name of the printer sometimes appearing on the back of the title page where the name of the publisher is usually found. This is especially common in the case of self-published works because the author doesn’t think to put his own name as the publisher, and wants inquiries for purchases to go to the printer, who, in the 1800s, often also operated a bookstore to sell the works they printed.

[13] My own analysis of data drawn from Flake, Mormon Bibliography, 1830-1930. This database can be found online at (http://lib.byu.edu/dlib/mormon_bib/).

[14] My own analysis of data drawn from Flake, Mormon Bibliography, 1830-1930. This database can be found online at (http://lib.byu.edu/dlib/mormon_bib/).

[15] My own analysis of data drawn from Flake, Mormon Bibliography, 1830-1930. This database can be found online at (http://lib.byu.edu/dlib/mormon_bib/).

So: What do you think are some major developments that MUST be included in any summary of Mormon literature? And which literary artists, critics, editors, works, and websites MUST be mentioned?

No Going Back is a coming-of-age novel about a gay Mormon teenager who is torn between his feelings and his desire to stay in the Church. The cover blurb reads:

“A gay teenage Mormon growing up in western Oregon in 2003. His straight best friend. Their parents. A typical LDS ward, a high-school club about tolerance for gays, and a proposed anti-gay-marriage amendment to the state constitution. In No Going Back, these elements combine in a coming-of-age story about faithfulness and friendship, temptation and redemption, tough choices and conflicting loyalties.”

(A side-note: Does anyone know the logic that Amazon.com uses in deciding on the size of the discount it offers? My book is now selling for $11.53. Rift, by Todd Robert Petersen, released just a few weeks ago by Zarahemla Books, is selling for $13.22. Both have a cover price of $16.95. Chris Bigelow says he doesn’t know the logic, either.)

As we approach publication, I’m trying to round up people who might have an interest in reading and reviewing the book, not just for AMV but for any other venue (electronic, print, etc.) that might have an interest in the subject matter.

Apropos of which, here’s the back-cover blurb describing the book:

“A gay teenage Mormon growing up in western Oregon in 2003. His straight best friend. Their parents. A typical LDS ward, a high-school club about tolerance for gays, and a proposed anti-gay-marriage amendment to the state constitution. In No Going Back, these elements combine in a coming-of-age story about faithfulness and friendship, temptation and redemption, tough choices and conflicting loyalties.”

So far as I know, this is the first novel to address the issue of same-sex attraction/gayness within an LDS context for a general LDS audience. It doesn’t end in suicide (a question I’ve been asked more than once), and the main thrust describes a teenager whose goal is to stay in the Church, not one whose path inevitably leads him out of the Church. I consider the book as now edited to be roughly PG-13 in terms of language and sexually explicit themes. (Those of you who read the manuscript may be interested to know that the language is slightly toned down from what you saw.)

At this point, I can’t say for sure when print copies of the book will be available, though we are shooting for sometime in October. Electronic (PDF) files should be available for review before that. I think that both Chris Bigelow (my publisher) and I are inclined to be fairly liberal in the matter of distributing electronic copies for review, so long as the reader can promise to (a) at least attempt to read the book with a possible interest in talking about it afterwards in some vaguely appropriate venue, and (b) not to copy or distribute the review copy. Print copies, alas, we will need to be more chary with, due to the fact that neither Chris nor I is swimming in money. So your chances of getting a review copy are better if you can settle for PDF – and you’ll be able to get it quicker too.

FYI, those who read and commented on part or all of the manuscript will eventually be receiving a complimentary print copy of the book (with the exception of one reader who preferred a PDF copy). However, if any of you who read the manuscript would like a PDF version earlier so that you can look at the book as it actually turned out and review and/or take part in discussions, please let me know.

Anyone who is interested in a review copy should email me, Jonathan Langford, at Jonathan At motleyvision DOT org, with:
- Your name
- Your qualifications to review
- The venue where you might review/discuss the book
- Whether you’re requesting a print or electronic copy

Please feel free to mention this to anyone you think might have an interest. I’d also welcome any suggestions for additional places to contact about lining up reviewers. Thanks!

Defining Mormon literature from the writer’s/editor’s/publisher’s perspective is probably the most labyrinthine discussion in the world of Mormon letters–with most definitions leaning toward anything and everything relating to Mormons. Irreantum’s definition is a good example. In the submissions section it says:

Irreantum seeks to publish high-quality work that explores the Mormon experience, directly or by implication, through literature. We acknowledge a broad range of experience with Mormonism, both as a faith and as a culture — on the part of devoted multi-generation Mormons, ethnic Mormons, new converts, and people outside of the faith and culture who interact with Mormons and Mormon culture.

Under the reviews section it states it more succinctly. Mormon literature is basically, “any books of fiction or poetry, films, or plays written by, for, or about Mormons, or that also may be of interest to a Mormon readership (such as books with strong religious themes).” That’s pretty open and that seems to be where most other magazines and publishers draw the line.

However, it’s also obvious that many, many readers don’t agree with that open definition. Take last year’s snafu over LDS Publisher accepting Angel Falling Softly as a contest sponsor as an example. Or AMV’s heated discussion of Brother Brigham by D. Michael Martindale. Both books are obviously by, for, and about Mormons. But many, many LDS readers were offended by the association.

So why the gap between the writers/editors and the readers? That’s where the Mormon Literary Litmus Test comes in.

Most readers will readily admit that defining great/worthy/recommendable literature is highly subjective. But, when it comes to niche marketing and writing, the subjectivity becomes limited. After all, niches by their very definition are limited and specific and in the case of the Mormon market those limitations come in the form of *gulp* morals. It is the Mormon/LDS stance on moral issues that sets its members apart from the culture at large and it is how individual Mormons relate to those moral stances that set Mormon/LDS readers apart from the the national market. The doctrinal idea that no Mormon can be a fence-sitter, that we cannot be lukewarm and still be part of the body of Christ, only makes this debate more heated.

Of course not every reader will relate to the morality the same so there is a degree of subjectivity but that subjectivity is hedged by the inherent culture expectations and pressures to make moral stands. (This, in part, explains the success of Deseret Book even though so many readers are displeased with the books they find in the stores. Deseret Book understands and caters to the cultural moral expectations.) In other words, because we are readers and because we are Mormons we each have our own litmus test, the way we take a stand,–they may all be different litmus tests, but we have them all the same. My personal litmus test: Do I identify with the work in question? Does the literature represent me, my beliefs, and experiences in some way?

At first glance this sounds almost as open as Irreantum, but I worry that it isn’t. I’m a pretty normal Mormon gal and I’ve lived a pretty normal Mormon life. Raised in Utah, married young, had kids–it’s a story that many Mormons could tell as they introduce themselves in sacrament meeting. But the Church doesn’t only exist in the Rocky Mountain west. It doesn’t belong only to born-in-the-covenant members. There are a lot of members (and ex-members) out there and each of their stories IS part of the LDS experience, but they aren’t necessarily part of MY LDS experience.

My litmus test makes it easy to like books like Bound on Earth or, because so many other LDS chicks read them, Stephenie Meyer’s The Twilight Saga, but classic books like The Backslider push the limits of my litmus test. There is almost nothing in that book I identify with. The only thing that feels even remotely familiar is the protagonist’s intense yearning to understand the nature of Christ’s love and atoning sacrifice. On the other hand, other classics, like Marilyn Brown’s The Earthkeepers and Virginia Sorensen’s Where Nothing is Long Ago don’t reflect directly on my experience, but the moods of those books feel comfortable and stretch my litmus test without trying to break it. In fact, that might be the very reason they are classics: because they push people just enough but not too hard.

A friend and ward member who is also an avid reader defines her litmus test much like Madeleine L’Engle does in Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art (Wheaton Literary Series). In talking about her actor-husband’s roles on stage she said that if the kids couldn’t see him in it, then he wouldn’t accept the part (p 79). My friend chooses which books to buy and keep according to the kind of reading experiences they will give her children. She asks herself, “Would I ever want my child to read this?” If the answer is no then she doesn’t keep the book. L’Engle says this kind of screening and thought process is the mark of artistic integrity and I would venture that many Mormon readers feel the same.

For me, I’ve decided that a litmus test in and of itself is not bad. It is limiting but only if readers don’t recognize they have one. Of course, now I have to know, what’s your litmus test?

Just to let you know, we’ve received some very positive responses on the MS, including reviews from LDS playwright Tom Rogers and BYU English professor Steve Walker. The MS has been through several rounds of revision already. But we’re still hoping to make it better.

This is also, as Theric reminded me to mention, the book I’ve been blathering on about here at AMV for months now. For a list of my Writing Rookie blogs describing my writing process, click here.

I’m NOT looking for a proofreader/copyeditor (Chris will do that, after I’ve polished as much as I can). Rather, what I’m looking for is honest overall responses to the book, plus feedback about what works and what doesn’t work for you as a reader: scenes, character developments, plot events, stylistic irritations, etc.

Rather than going into much detail about the book here, I’ll simply jot down a few points of orientation. First, this book is about a teenager who’s trying to stay in the Church, and who by the end of the book is still holding to that decision, although he’s had a fair number of difficulties along the way. Second, I’d rate this as about a PG-13, both for language (though it’s less than what many teenagers use) and for a reported sexual encounter (which is, however, critical for the story).

My primary intended audience for this book is believing Mormons who are doctrinally orthodox but relatively liberal in their reading tastes and tolerances. I’m hoping the book will appeal not only to those with connections to gays (e.g., family members who are gay) but also to those (bishops, other leaders, and just ordinary folks) who may wonder about the kinds of challenges that those who are same-sex attracted face in the Church and how the rest of the LDS community can help support them.

Our plan is for the book to be released this summer. Chris and I figure that having more people read it in MS now will mean more good comments to guide my revision, as well as generating more publicity for the book itself. What you get out of it is a chance to read this groundbreaking book – okay, groundbreaking within the LDS market – for free! And possibly even have an impact on it and get your name mentioned as one of my readers on the Acknowledgments page! What more could you ask for? (Don’t answer that…)

Honestly, we really do want a range of opinions and perspectives. No literary credentials needed – just a willingness to read and give feedback. I may not take your suggestions, but I will listen to them carefully.

If you’re interested in reading the MS, contact me at jonathan@motleyvision.org for details.

According to WindRiver Publisher, E. Keith “JB” Howick, Jr., Mapletree Publishing has 16 titles in print, and 5 under contract, while WindRiver has 30 titles in print and 3 under contract. He expects new titles published to stay the same or dip slightly, before rising in subsequent years.

Mapletree’s employees are not transferring from its Mesa, Arizona headquarters to WindRiver’s offices in Silverton, Idaho, but since Mapletree used mainly contractors, this means just the owner and one employee are leaving the industry.

Howick says that Mapletree has developed a name for books on home schooling, child development and family values, and that its future position, as an imprint (i.e., brand, the name on the spine of books) of WindRiver, will focus on those non-fiction areas. Fiction titles will eventually be transferred to WindRiver, and future fiction submissions should go there.

Analysis:

Howick, one of the more progressive and informed publishers in the LDS market (he has even commented here on occasion, unlike others in the industry), has done a credible job building WindRiver, and I think this acquisition improves its position in the market. Certainly adding 50% more titles makes it easier to get LDS bookstores to carry its titles.

But unlike at the top of the market, I don’t have the worry that combining these two companies will have a negative effect on the market. The number of titles involved is relatively small (perhaps 1% of the market), and because both companies are small, even if titles are eliminated, the effect isn’t very large.

Instead, this merger creates a single larger, and probably stronger, company from two smaller companies. Good strong companies are, I think, always a boon to the market.

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Since last General Conference I’ve been meaning to look at the books mentioned in each Conference, just to see what items General Authorities think fit to mention. I’ve finally managed to complete my look at last conference, and I’m starting to look at this conference. The list is, I think, interesting.

Looking at what books are mentioned in Conference is much easier these days than it used to be. The talks as published on the web and in the Ensign include notes, and almost always the notes include a reference to the book, including date published. Years ago there were no notes, which makes looking at what books were referenced much more difficult.

Here’s the list of books (doesn’t include periodical articles, the Scriptures, Hymnals and Church manuals, pamphlets and handbooks) mentioned in April Conference (I think I got everything — let me know if something is missing):

• Dew, Sheri, Go Forward With Faith: The Biography of Gordon B. Hinckley. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1996.
• Emerson, Ralph Waldo. The Complete Essays and Other Writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson. New York: W. H. Wise & Co., 1929.
• Kimball, Edward L., The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1982. (cited in two separate talks).
• Kimball, Spencer W., The Miracle of Forgiveness. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1969.
• McCulloch, James E., Home: the Savior of Civilization,. Washington, D.C., Southern co-operative league, 1924.
• McDonald, Lee Martin, The Formation of Christian Biblical Canon: Revised and Expanded Edition. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1988.
• Metzger, Bruce Manning, Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Palaeography. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981.
• Monson, Thomas S., Pathways to Perfection: Discourses of Thomas S. Monson. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1973.
• Pedersen, Marva Jeanne Kimball, Crozier Kimball, His Life and Work.  Carr Printing, 1995.
• Pratt, Parley P., The Autobiography of Parley P. Pratt. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1938.
• Rice, Helen Steiner, Expressions of Comfort. Ulrichsville, OH: Barbour Publishing, 2007.
• Robinson, Stephen Edward, Are Mormons Christians? Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1991.
• Schweitzer, Albert, The Quest of the Historical Jesus. [1948].
• Smith, Joseph, The History of the Church. Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret News, 1902-1932.
• Smith, Joseph Fielding. Doctrines of Salvation. Salt Lake City, UT: Bookcraft, 1954-56.
• Whitney, Orson F., The Life of Heber C. Kimball. 2nd ed. Salt Lake City, UT: Stevens & Wallis, 1945.
• Wright, N. T., The Last Word: Beyond the Bible Wars to a New Understanding of the Authority of Scripture. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2005.

I guess its not too surprising a list, but I do find several items very interesting. The books on the biblical canon are all from Elder Holland’s talk My Words… Never Cease, which refutes the idea that the canon is closed. I found the citation to the book by Helen Steiner Rice interesting, because its unusual to see poetry or fiction cited in Conference. [From what I can tell, she is poetry's answer to Thomas Kincade - not exactly the kind of poetry that I enjoy.]

For what its worth, today’s sessions brought another unusual reference, this time to fiction: Antoine de Saint-Exupéry’s The Little Prince. With that reference, I’m very interested to see what else might be mentioned.

I enjoyed it and learned from it so I suppose that means that it’s a good book. Reminds be a bit of John Gardner’s On Moral Fiction in its breadth and insistent literariness. I liked that Wood uses tons of examples from literature and that he expresses a real breadth as a reader (although he doesn’t deal much with genre) in that he likes and finds value in works of literary realism, postmodernism, and pre-realism, yet isn’t afraid to show where all of them can go wrong. He cites (approvingly) James and Nabokov and Austen and Stendhal and others and does a good job of not conflating all of them. He shows where there are serious points of differences. I also love that he clearly loves novels, loves fiction. And he goes after some of the silly truisms that get passed on, celebrating all types of metaphor and characters and style and point of view (although he does go on about free indirect discourse a lot — but he’s right — it’s what makes novels unique and wonderful and heterglossic, to borrow from Bakhtin). One wishes for a bit more structure and the latter 1/3 of the book seems a bit more rushed and less-developed than what comes before.

I do want to quote one section from How Fiction Works because it relates to a particular issue that comes up quite a bit in Mormon fiction circles. It’s not the most quotable work because so much depends on specific examples and prior discussion, but hopefully this comes across okay enough:

A great deal of nonsense is written every day about characters in fiction — from the side of those who believe too much in character and from the side of those who believe too little. Those who believe too much have an iron set of prejudices about what characters are: we should get to “know” them; they should not be “stereotypes”; they should have an “inside” as well as an outside, depth as well as surface; they should “grow” and “develop”; and they should be nice. So they should be pretty much like us. (101).

He goes on to cite a New York Times review of the films The History Boys and Venus. Neither film sounds like something I would want to see — something about old men who grope young boys. There is indeed an “ick factor” there. But if I disagree with the particular example, I do think what he has to say about this in relation to characterization is worth thinking about and discussing:

In other words, artists should not ask us to try to understand characters we cannot approve of — or not until after they have firmly and unequivocally condemned them. The idea that we might be able to feel that “ick factor” and simultaneously see life through the eyes of these two aging and lecherous men, and that this moving out of ourselves into realms beyond our daily experience might be a moral and sympathetic education of its own kind, seems beyond this particular commentator, of whom all one can say is that she is unlikely to be so unforgiving when she herself has reached seventy. But there is nothing egregious about this article. A glance at the thousands of foolish “reader reviews” on Amazon.com, with their complaints about “dislikeable characters,” confirms a contagion of moralizing niceness. (102)

Bit of a cheap shot there, Mr. Wood (and speaking of characters — I keep picturing the author of How Fiction Works as the animated version of James Woods playing himself on “Family Guy” [James Woods, incidentally, was born in Vernal, Utah). But it raises the issue of this: unless you condemn all fiction then I don’t think that it’s fair either to say a) the characters made me do it and b) the characters are dislikeable/immoral and so that must mean the book (and perhaps the author) is too. Authors are in control of their characters. Readers are in control of their response to the story. Flat characters can be interesting, entertaining and instructive. Round characters can be insufferably boring and lame. Meta-fiction can be interesting and well-done or it can be pretty stupid. etc. etc.

We all make certain allowances when we read fiction. I firmly believe that individual readers have the right to make the allowances they wish and to draw the boundaries where they so desire. But I also think that, in general, the more we take fiction to be fictive and the more we stretch our willingness to work with the styles, plots and characters (in a variety of modes — I have no patience for those who can’t read 19th century fiction because they are too lazy to work with non-20th-century transparent genre style nor with those who refuse to read genre fiction because they have some narrow notion of style and literariness or even worse of “literary realism”) of all types of storytelling, the more interesting readers (and writers and reviewers) we become.

I have wondered in the past if I’m not just not demanding enough of a reader because I enjoy so many types of genres, authors, styles, etc. I don’t know that I can make any large claims about magnanimity because I still have my irrational blind spots and reading ruts. And yet, I can say that being able to delight in a wide assortment of characters is fulfilling and fun.

So instead I have decided to offer a glimpse of a work in progress. It was originally called “The Courtship of Elder Cannon.” Apparently I retitled it “Elder Cannon Remarries” at some point. It’s been almost a year since I last worked on it so I’m a bit rusty on where I was going with it, but I think it’s the next piece of creative writing I want to focus on. I originally envisioned it as a longish short story, but now I’m thinking of putting my money where my mouth is and try to write a novella.

I suppose this is rather self-indulgent on my part. And I know writers are supposed to be superstitious about not letting this stuff see the light of day until a full draft is complete (and even then only to a few readers). But I thought that I’d take a cue from the non-fiction author-bloggers and forward-thinking speculative fiction writers and go public with the project and provide a teaser of what’s been written so far.

So without further ado, here are the first 2,000 words of the first draft of “Elder Cannon Remarries.”

Elder Cannon Remarries (alternate title: The Courtship of Elder Cannon)

So this is what it has come to, he wrote in his journal, a glass of chocolate milk at his elbow, jazz playing loudly in the background. 14 months, one week, and four days after burying Rachel, a member of the Twelve has set me up on a blind date.

He stopped typing for a moment and relived the events of the day in his mind. He wasn’t sure how much to put down. This journal was strictly his. There was no need to edit. His posterity would read a different history, one that was true, but was weekly compiled from his daily ramblings, one that was edited, not heavily, but edited nonetheless. Still, if writing was his therapy, then forming the sentences, telling the story of the day in a way that made sense to him was how he did it. He didn’t believe in streaming down words, simply regurgitating the day. Everything had to be contextualized and encoded.

On the one hand, I find the proposition so completely ludicrous that it doesn’t even deserve mentioning. On the other hand, I agreed to go on the date. Yes, I did not want to say no to Elder M. I mean, how does one say no to an Apostle? But more to the point, well, my hope is that this date thing will take the heat off a bit. When he first mentioned…

He stopped again. Charles had brought up the idea over the lunch. The moment it registered, he experienced a small, slightly thrilling shock. Were they preparing him to become an Apostle? Why else would they need for him to remarry? He pushed those thoughts quickly out of his mind. That’s not how things are done. Charles would have no way of knowing who was in line. And only the Lord knew when. He wrote on a typewriter so instead of erasing the halted sentence, he simply pressed the tab key twice. He knew what the blank space meant. This journal entry would be one he would return to, no doubt, probably as early as late Thursday evening of next week:

It’s strange that I would feel the pressure. I have had the luxury of being afforded a certain latitude as a general authority. But hints have been dropped. The topic has come up, obliquely, often in the context of discussion about other widowers. Elder R. seems so happy doesn’t he? I’m sure he misses his Edith, but with the burden he carries, he sure is blessed to have found Judy. What does one say in response? That: I know that Rachel is waiting for me on the other side, but I miss her in this existence. I wanted more time with her in mortality. I have no doubts about the glory of the resurrection, but it was her imperfect body and unrefined spirit that I fell in love with. That is the Rachel I know, and the promise of the coming day, while comforting, is also foreign, just like she, though she will be the same, will be foreign, with a foreign body. No, of course I can’t say that. I don’t want to say that. I smile and nod, not because I’m afraid to make waves, heaven knows, I’ve tossed my share of rocks into the pool, but because I will carry my burden alone. It is only in being alone that I can keep her presence, her absence near. Close enough to feel.

The CD stopped playing. He finished his chocolate milk and went to bed.

****

The next day, Elder R. filled him in on the date: “Okay, so she is a RN who went back to school when she was in her 40’s and earned a doctoral degree in literature. She teaches at the Y. Her fiancé died in Vietnam. Ten years later her second fiancé didn’t show up for his interview with the Stake President.”

“Why are you telling me all this, Charles?” he asked. He knew the answer, but he asked the question anyway.

“I just thought that these are things you’d like to know because…”

“You don’t need to explain to me why she has never been married. Her history is of no concern to me.”

“Now, Bruce…”

“I get it. I know you need to establish her credentials, to show why she has never been married but still is eminently marriageable. But let’s let the lady maintain some privacy. Our culture has, I’m sure, questioned her her whole life. Her dignity lies in what she has done with her life, not in that her missed chances weren’t her fault.”

He knew that Charles meant well, but he also knew that the only way to dull the pain of the entire discussion was to keep the personal out of the equation. Righteous indignation was always a convenient fallback. He believed what he had said, but he also knew that he was using his belief as a defensive move and that kept the pain away, but it also left him vulnerable. He felt his shoulders tighten.

Elder R. unbuttoned and then buttoned his suit coat. He looked up straight into Bruce’s face and his eyes flared with honesty and humor. “Bruce, I know you miss Rachel. I know that this all seems very strange, especially since I’ve become the poster-boy for aged romance, and you know you don’t have to do this.”

Bruce kept his gaze steady. He wanted more. Elder R. matched his gaze for a moment then calmly said:

“You have to believe me when I say that the idea didn’t come first. Judy and I haven’t been sitting around plotting. She met Miriam a few months ago. They hit it off. And once I met her, it became quite clear that she is someone you should meet. That’s all. That’s all there is.”

Bruce creased his lips into a tight smile. He was touched, amused, angry and sad. The combination of emotions was unsettling, but it felt good to be a little riled up. He nodded his head slowly. “I trust your judgment. I will be there next Thursday. But don’t be disappointed if things don’t work out.”

“I’ll leave it up to you two to discover that promise you made to each other in the preexistence,” said Elder R.

Bruce laughed, and the tension drained from his body. He couldn’t wait to get home and put on some Dave Brubeck.

That night when he sat down at the typewriter, he wasn’t in the mood to write so he picked up his journal and began reading from the entry of the day before, moving backwards through the binder with a slow, steady rhythm. His eyes glazed each page with the soothing ease of familiarity. He read not to relive but to experience time as un-immediate. Time removed from the onward march of things done and yet to do. This was his history and unlike his memory, the book written in heaven, it will not stand in judgment against him for once the words become frozen in type they cease to be part of his corruptible, mortal being.

]]> http://www.motleyvision.org/2008/work-in-progress-elder-cannon-remarries/feed/ 16