It is little surprise to anyone that my book is not terribly popular among the Saints, even though the majority of those who are dissing it have not even read it, and probably never will.
After the Salt Lake Tribune panned it, many quickly jumped on the bandwagon to condemn it, and crow about the bad review, even though it is the ONLY bad review the book has received. Out of more than 25 reviews, mind you.
I found this on a Mormon blog, which discussed The Tribune review and the review in the Indy Star, both of which ran the same day. I’m sure you don’t need rocket science to determine which review the blogger is siding with.
However, that is not my point. I found this statement interesting.
Look. I don’t care if you are ex-Mo, Orthodox Mormon or whatever. Somebody write a nuanced, interesting, sophisticated novel with a certain measure of literary value to it and find some eastern publisher publish it. At this point, all we have in recent years is — what? The Miracle Life of Edgar Mint? Very good novel. But that was almost four years ago. It’s time for the national publishers to step up to the plate again.
How would you possibly know whether or not my novel is bad? You have not read it. You are basing your assumption on ONE BAD REVIEW, and ignoring all the other good reviews. My question to the Motley Blogger is why don’t you READ the book first before condemning it? Or, gee, would that make sense? You are basing your comments on TWO reviews. The only one you are giving credence is the BAD Salt Lake Tribune review. How’s that for biased?
What this person is saying, basically, is that until the “New York” publishers portray the Mormons the way the Mormons want to be portrayed, they will cry foul.
Mormonism is a strange culture. If you walk away, you are expected to just SHUT UP and leave it alone. God forbid you might write about a less than positive experience. SHUT UP. Leave it.
They are allowed to traipse the globe and knock on doors, telling people that they have THE ONLY ONE TRUTH.
What does that sound like?