I have obviously not been very consistent with blogging. Daily life steals time and thought with concerns that range from our children to my latest writing project and the national political scene. Most of all, it's been hard for me think of something to post online that would interest anyone who cares to look me up.
But this week I experienced a catharsis. I'm declaring my independence from debilitating worry about what literary highbrows might think or say if my work-in-progress novel ever makes it into print.
It all started when I discovered blogs--specifically writing blogs full of tips and reviews and commentary on the L.D.S. culture and arts scene. It's been a blessing for me to feel a sense of connection even though I haven't found a local writing group that meets my present needs. I also enjoyed learning about the newest novels, the Whitney Awards, and an annual writers' conference that I enjoyed attending.
Then I started pondering some of the academics' opinions about the present state of L.D.S. fiction which basically exists in two camps: the popular romances, thrillers, and other genre titles and the literary novels usually penned by college professors who question and explore the nuances of L.D.S. life. I initially felt intimidated by their intellectual musings and wondered if I should abandon my novel altogether since the characters are born-in-the-covenant faithful Mormons who live in a small southern Utah town. Apparently some literary types frown upon rural Utah/Idaho settings.
I finally realized that I don't belong in the literary camp.
Yes, I've had aspirations of writing well enough to possibly win the Marilyn Brown award for the best novel of the year. I've prided myself on my B.A. in English and was taught to write literary fiction. I've turned up my nose at anything else.
After reading an interview with a best-selling author in which he blasts literary fiction with its existentialism and elitism, I was a bit shocked. Was it possible that well-written genre novels could be considered "legitimate" fiction? I was especially intrigued by his challenge to write like Shakespeare who created fascinating characters and many levels of meaning, but didn't neglect to tell a dang good story.
People from all social classes flocked to see his plays. And the stories had to be good or else the peasant "groundlings" who crowded in front of the stage would pelt the actors with rotten tomatoes or worse. Little did they know they had the best seats in the house which now sell for the highest prices at the Shakespearean festival!
Back to my original thought: I've decided that I'm going rogue as a writer. Who says there has to be only two camps in the world of L.D.S. fiction? As a writer, I'm somewhere in between. In this particular novel, I want to explore the drama of daily life with its juxtapositions of the bitter and the sweet, goodness and evil. I believe that characters in a rural setting can still develop widespread appeal in our modern, urbanized world. (Heaven knows we can relate to the tragic results of Hamlet's indecisiveness even though he was a prince in medieval Denmark.) A middle-brow audience of ordinary people is out there, their taste is valid, and their challenges and triumphs can be addressed in a dang good story.
You betcha.
Nice post mom! I agree.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree. Personally I don't read a lot of L.D.S. literature because the two camps bore me...give me something different.
ReplyDeleteHooray for you! I don't read much LDS literature either - I'm afraid to after too many "cheesy" experiences. And I know that's one thing you won't be! My favorite novels are "middle brow". Danielle Steele stuff makes me want to spill my upper digestive system. And I'd gladly trash William Faulkner. Jane Austen is a beloved author and I wouldn't call her high brow!
ReplyDelete