A Big Steaming Pile About The Great Mormon Novel

Warning: J. Golden-like language may be invoked.

People who know me would say I'm fairly laid back.  Things usually don't ruffle my feathers.  I don’t rant much.  But this article rubbed me wrong in so many ways it's difficult to know where to begin.

Jerry Johnston in his infinite and insightful wisdom (via the Mormon Times) has provided us with a little nugget of erudite criticism: there can be no such thing as a Great Mormon Novel.

Johnston says that, “the Great Mormon Novel is a dream held by literary types in the church,” but after reflecting on a conversation he once had with Wallace Stegner, he has come to a sure conclusion that the Great Mormon Novel is a pipedream.

"Since that day with Stegner, I've thought often about LDS novels. And I've reached the conclusion that Stegner hadn't found the Great Mormon Novel because ... there can never be one."

Now whether there can be such a thing as a Great Mormon Novel is fraught with all kinds of problems of definition and quality, just as the idea of the Great American Novel is a never-ending quest for some American writers and critics.  And the question whether there exists a Great American Novel doesn’t really matter, because there are plenty of American Novels that are Great: Scarlet Letter, Moby Dick, Huck Finn, Grapes of Wrath, Light in August, Great Gatsby to name a few that come to mind.  Can one be great above all else?  Since novels are so different, they can be Great in a myriad of ways that capture the American experience, while not having to be Thee One.

I think the same is probably true for Mormon literature.  Maybe some day, there will be a Great Mormon Novel, but until then will we have to be satisfied with plenty of great Mormon lit that aspires to something more that just faith promoting pablum.

But I’m getting off track here. I want to get back to Jerry Johnston.  Whether there can be a Great Mormon Novel is beside the point; what I find interesting is Jerry Johnston’s reasoning why there can’t be one to begin with.  And this is where my bullshit meter started to rise.  Jerry says:

"I have known some marvelous Mormon wordsmiths. But being a Mormon is not like being Catholic or Jewish. There is precious little wiggle room for devout LDS writers. There aren't a lot of gray areas to explore."

No gray areas to explore?  Really?  I mean: really, really?  It’s almost impossible for my feeble brain to think that life is so simple.  Anyone who is literate enough to read one competent book on Mormon history knows that it is fraught with gray areas, in addition to the challenge of living a Mormon life in a contemporary world across many world cultures.  So, Jerry, really no gray areas?

Ok, He continues:

"The Mormon religion demands a lot of people. At its core, Mormonism demands all of one's talents to the furthering of the Kingdom of God. That means a complete surrender of one's ego, ideas and ambitions."

True dat.  But I’m not sure what this has to do with creative writing.  Did I miss something? 

Wallace Stegner told Jerry:

“…the "Great Mormon Novel" would eventually be penned by someone who was born in the church, left the church, then made it "part way" back again. [Stegner] seemed to think that would be a perfect vantage point. Being away from the church would give the writer perspective, while coming part way back would guarantee his empathy for the culture.”

This seems to make sense to me.  To write honestly and truthfully about any culture the writer’s perspective is critical.  And seeing things from the inside as well as outside is essential.

But Jerry disagrees with Stegner, and tells us why a Great Mormon Novel can not be written.  The crux of Jerry argument is thus:

"A true LDS writer would not want to be on the outside looking in. He wouldn't want to be defiant.

He'd want to promote the faith."

Initial comment: apparently in Jerry’s world only men write novels.  (Bullshit meter rising.)

But there you have it.  A Great Mormon Novel could not be written because only a “true LDS writer” would be restrained by his perfect devotion in promoting the faith, consequently he would be unable to write something Great.

There are so many problems with his line of thinking.  First off, as I've said, men are not the only writers of novels. (It’s so sad that I actually have to point that out to Jerry.) Secondly, what the hell is a “true LDS writer?”  Define please.  Thirdly, a writer who is on “the outside looking in” is not tantamount to “defiance.”  A Mormon can be perfectly faithful and write from the perspective of colorful, outsider, even evil characters – that’s why they call it creative fiction.  (Orson Scott Card anyone?)  And fourthly, but not lastly, why would promoting one’s faith exclude someone from writing a Great Mormon Novel?  (To diverge from novels a little, hasn’t Jerry ever heard of Dante or Milton, both of whom could be argued as promoting their own faith?)

Ok, but let us have Jerry explain himself a little more.  Maybe he’ll start to make sense.

"Great Catholic writers, like Flannery O'Connor and Graham Greene, could follow their muse and stay in the Catholic fold. They could give us all kinds of flawed and distorted character. They could write graphically about sin, reel off heretical theological speculations and even lampoon Catholic authority figures, yet remain in the bosom of their church."

But….

"Mormons -- card-carrying temple Mormons -- can never have that luxury."

So in Jerry’s world, I guess only card-carrying temple Mormons (the only kind of Mormons that seem to matter) have the ability to write true Mormon novels?  But their card-carrying temple Mormon status prevents them from writing such novels in the first place? (Someone better tell Orson Scott Card to stop writing novels or give up his temple recommend immediately!) 

In addition, Mormons can’t write graphically about sin, like O’Connor and Greene?  Maybe Jerry hasn’t read the Book of Mormon or Bible lately, where the graphic nature of sin is on display in spades. 

Oh, but it gets better.

"In the future, I'm sure LDS writers will produce wonderful novels.

But a grand and glorious literary novel that is heralded by both the LDS faithful and the literary world?

I don't think so.

Without the blessing of the church, it would never really be a Mormon novel – "

So now you have to get the blessing of the church to confirm that you have actually even written a novel?  Is there some sort of application process I am totally unaware of?  Who gives the blessing?  Is there some secret list that gets passed around that’s been hidden from me?  I suppose all the books categorized as novels in your local LDS bookseller might actually not be a novel at all.  You better check to see if the church gave the novel its blessing to confirm its novel status.

This article could have actually been good.  Using Stegner’s insight could have been developed and explored within the context of Mormon belief.  But I’m not sure why it turned out the way it did.  Deadline, possibly.  Come on Jerry, you are a helluva lot smarter than this.  Who do you think your audience is? A bunch of dumbshits?

But I have to say, unequivocally, this article is such absolute, complete, irrational, dumbass, horseshit, I can see the brown busting out of Jerry’s head. 

Or maybe I am simply out of touch.  Maybe I’m filled with crap.  But a still, small voice nags at me …

Oh, by the way Jerry, there are a growing number of Mormon Novels that are Great: The Giant Joshua, The Evening and the Morning, the Alvin Maker books, Backslider, Salvador, to name just a paltry few.  Pick one up and you decide.

UPDATE 6.16.09:

After reading my post a week after writing it, I feel that I was a little over-the-top and harsh on Jerry Johnston personally.  As one writer to another, I know what it feels like to have your writing torn apart limb from limb - I've suffered from that enough.  Though I still disagree vigorously with Jerry's essay itself, I do think Jerry is a stand-up guy, and a tough guy who could easily stand the little snipping of a no-name blogger like myself.  I apologize Jerry for being mean.  It's usually not in my nature.  My blog post was not meant as any sort of personal attack, only a critque of your essay itself.  My apologies.

Comments

[David J. West]

"Without the blessing of the church, it would never really be a Mormon novel – "

That has to be one of the most assinine statements I have ever heard on the subject of LDS lit.

I'm glad you mentioned the Alvin Maker books, I thought I was alone in liking them more than Enders Game.

"In the future, I'm sure LDS writers will produce wonderful novels."

How convienent, he can be disproved after he's dead apparently.

[Th.]

.

!!!!!

I cannot accept this moronic reasoning. It makes no sense, none at all. This man knows nothing about the writing of fiction, that much is clear.

[adamf]

"Without the blessing of the church, it would never really be a Mormon novel – "

Haha, no wonder Mormon Doctrine was struck down. ;)

I agree with your thoughts here. I don't see why it wouldn't work. Fiction is quoted all the time even in GenCon.

[Th.]

.

We see this regularly. And I think William might be right about what the Mormon Artist's task is, now, today.

[S.P. Bailey]

Johnston is all kinds of wrong. I started writing a comment, and it got out of control. What my comment became.

[S.P. Bailey]

The link I tried to embed in comment disappeared: http://www.motleyvision.org/2009/abandon-all-hope-mormon-lit-cant-be-great/

[Dallas]

Cool. Just read it.

[JulieW8]

I suppose it goes back to the defining "Mormon novel." A novel written by a Mormon? A card-carrying Mormon? A novel written by a Mormon that includes Mormon life? That would let out OSC, wouldn't it?

Here's my own bit of prediction - Johnston seems inclined to use such a narrow definition of what constitutes a Mormon novel that he has, in fact, insured his own prediction. If a "Mormon novel" is written by a card-carrying Mormon whose novel promotes the faith while ignoring the emotional context of faith and avoid any negative brushes - he's right, there will never be one. The thing that makes "Catholic" novels compelling is not that they are about Catholicism, but about the emotional issues of faith, godliness and worldliness, and the shortcomings of God's work being administered by mortals.

[Moriah Jovan]

The Great Mormon Novel will serve to put our customs, jargon, and humanity out on display for the world to become as accustomed to us as it is to Catholicism and Judaism.

It will *not* be aimed at church members (on whatever sliding scale of righteousness). It'll be aimed at everyone BUT them.

[Th.]

.

Crap. My embedded links too. No html here?

Only one hasn't already been mentioned:

http://thmazing.blogspot.com/2007/04/that-kind-of-movie-svithe.html

[Jeremy]

Great Mormon Novel already written.

Levi Peterson's _Backslider_.

Sooner or later "Cowboy Jesus" will get the attention he deserves from the wider literary world.

[David Murdoch]

I don't know very much about this topic, but a catholic writer who wrote heretical statements in their literature and who knew that they were rejecting catholic doctrine, wouldn't 'remain in the bosom of the church' either.

God Bless,

[Wm Morris]

“the Great Mormon Novel is a dream held by literary types in the church”

I think Johnston is sort of right here, but I'd like to see some documentation other than this assertion (of course, newspaper columnist don't *do* citation). It seems to me that the Great Mormon Novel is not a dream held by literary types, but rather a dream held by those who are in the adolescence of their thinking about Mormon culture. That is what is the Great Mormon Novel other than a box to check off so we can be as cool as other people's -- along with the Great Mormon Quarterback and the Great Mormon Politician and the Great Mormon Golfer and the Great Mormon Businessman and the Great Mormon Director, etc. etc.

As Dallas alludes to, the real literary types have a much more conflicted, nuance and complex view of literary production and reception and canon formation.

Also: Wallace Stegner said what he said because he was a product of 20th century American Western Regionalism with its emphasis on outsiders and heretics. But you know what -- we already had our Lost Generation, which produced some pretty Great novels by the way, and since culture has already gone through post-modernism and digested it and co-opted it, it seems to me that the Great Mormon Novel as it were is more likely going to be a Mormon turning a critical eye towards American culture e.g. a post-colonialist (because let's forget we were colonized) approach.

[Jared]

Thanks for the great post. The arguments sound incredibly similar to the debates about Mormon filmmaking, where a lot of narrow-minded and pretentious folks sit around saying it can't be done.

Maybe it's just the rebellious part of me that hears statements like that and wants to disprove them, but my testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel actually has even greater force in encouraging me to fight against the pricks (pun intended).

Anyone who begins to say that our testimonies are only best expressed when we're dressed as proselytizing missionaries or standing at the pulpit on sundays has a surprisingly limited view of how God expects us to use the talents we are given.

Those who argue that any form of storytelling created by the devout would be stripped of struggle, doubt and sin has never met a truly devout member of any faith: one who has struggled against the forces of the natural man to reconcile their soul with the demands of a God who expects better of them.

Those devout members, in my humble opinion, have profound and complex stories to tell, and ones that express a more accessibly human worldview and more profound sense of redemption and God's love for his children.

Anyway, I'll wrap up my soapboxing and thank you again for continuing the debate

(for more debates on the validity of mormon storytelling, you should check out these posts:

http://www.twas-brillig.com/2009/06/01/just-dont-scream/

and the subsequent post:

http://www.twas-brillig.com/2009/06/04/controvversee/

[Jared]

Some interesting insights into the formal and doctrinal elements in Jer3miah that seem to be spurring such a fascinating debate:

http://gideonburton.typepad.com/gideon_burtons_blog/2009/06/jer3miah.html