I’m writing a novel right now where the main character is female, black, and LDS. The fact that she’s black won’t really come out until well into the novel. At this point, the fact that she’s LDS won’t come out explicitly at all, though someone reading the novel who knows that she’s LDS will see some signposts along the way, both in passing references by the character and in some of the choices she makes and the things she says to herself and others. And the novel itself doesn’t fit within the usual LDS fiction venue (think Tim Powers, though I claim none of his talents and skills).

Besides Potok (who is a great model), you might also consider Isaac Bashevis Singer as a model for a different type of LDS literature. ..bruce..

I also think Rameumptom is onto a very important point. It seems to me that “arts & letters” Mormons often spend more time trying to eradicate the Sunstone-DB/Seagull dichotomy than defining it. As a result, they don’t really “stand” anywhere. They straddle. Or make themselves safely irrelevant.

Mainstream Mormons want to be accepted by Mainstream Christians, and “arts & letters” Mormons want to be accepted by Mainstream Mormons, and nobody wants to offend anybody. Where’s the conflict?

I do not think there is enough difference between Iron Rodders and Sunstone Readers within the LDS Mormon church to create enough conflict for the average reader to want to absorb it, much less compare it to Chaim Potok’s Asher Lev.

One of the things Busby discusses in the essay (not printed here) is the fact that Potok wasn’t an “insider” within the orthodox Jewish community. We outsiders might *read* him as an insider, but if a Mormon author had written the equivalent of _My Name is Asher Lev_, for instance? I’m certain many orthodox Mormons would dismiss the author out of hand. Of course, Judaism casts a very wide net that includes conservative and liberal believers and everything in between. Mormonism, in contrast, has a very small net, and the size of this net has ramifications for those who want to stay inside it and still create compelling literature that resonates with a wide audience.

I agree, though, that telling a strong story is part the answer, as is being mindful of the “humanity” of the novel’s characters, as homeschoolin’hen said.

MoJo, I agree with you that the apparent DB/Sunstone dichotomy forces writers into corners where they don’t necessarily need to take up residence. And our novels don’t need to be primarily *about* Mormonism—I don’t think Potok’s novels were primarily about Judaism. In fact, novels that set out to either prove or excoriate Mormonism almost always have a very difficult time succeeding artistically, in my opinion.

And Th., when I first received the essay submission I wondered if we needed another Chaim Potok discussion in Mormon letters. But Busby does it so well that I believe it’s a very valuable addition to the conversation.