Ana's Final Essay: Audience?

For whom should LDS authors write?

LDS authors’ writings should be able to incorporate the general audience. Their works should be written in a way where people who are not of the LDS faith can understand. If they only write to an LDS audience, in a way only they can understand, the author is limited in their audience and who they are able to market to.  

Based on the topic, sometimes the author’s work should only be written for an LDS audience. If the topic isn’t sensitive or pertains to LDS culture, then it would be wise to expand the work’s audience to both members and non-members, and write it in such a way they all can understand the content and story—even if it is a sort of allegory for members.

When the author writes to both a non-LDS and LDS community, they are able to, not only increase their sales, but their books have the possibility to become more popular, as well as the fact that they belong to a certain faith—ex. Shannon Hale, Stephany Meyer, or Orson Scott Card. However, when the general audience discovers the author’s faith, sometimes they think what the author writes is a representation of the author’s faith. This was especially true with Stephany Meyer’s the Twilight series and Orson Scott Card’s Ender’s Game (as well as his Seventh Son).

Depending on the genre or the author’s humor, the LDS culture can sometimes (or often) slip into their writing. This can affect their audience, as only about half the audience may get some of the things they’ll read. Also, depending on how and where the author was raised, they might not be able to cater to the audience they want because they’re only used to a certain culture. This scenario is especially true for genres such as realistic fiction, non-fiction, and less so for science fiction and fantasy (ex. Seventh Son, even though it’s based on Joseph Smith, the book written in a way that even people who know nothing about Church history can get into the story). However, even some LDS fiction that isn’t in the realms of sf/f can be enjoyed by any person—for example, Martine Leavitt’s My Book of Life by Angel, as it was written about a sensitive topic that not too many people think about too often, without including lines that only members would understand.

Homespun and Angel Feathers covered a lot of LDS topics, and it was published for an LDS audience, yet some of the poems included were written in a way any person would laugh at (for example, “The Guys I didn’t Marry”, which was focused less on the LDS culture, but more about her personal life with relationships. Darlene Young’s poetry collection won’t get a lot of traffic, not only because of the publisher, but also because it’s poetry, so it doesn’t always have to do with the topic; sometimes it’s the type of writing (like poetry). Because she had to write it for an LDS audience, it decreases the chances of being read even more.

The best type of LDS writing is writing that can be understood by anyone (such as Orson Scott Card’s Seventh Son).

Final Essay: Premortality in Mormon Literature

A theme that I noticed across the different genres we read this semester was the theme of premortality. Very early on, we read Added Upon, by Nephi Anderson. Within this book Anderson attempts to portray what the war in heaven might have been like, and the feeling is largely detached. Anderson seems to be attempting to achieve a sort of "Mormon epic" and the detachment in this first section is key to the heaven-like pathos he is trying to develop. He portrays specific characters as having chosen to follow God, or being on the fence about which plan they are going to follow, which is a uniquely Mormon concept. The debates between characters about what the purpose of mortality will be drive the plot of the first fifth of the book. In this section, there also seem to be subtle hints of soulmate theology, which is complicated later in the book.

The movie Avatar by James Cameron also incorporates this theme subtly. Despite Avatar not being necessarily a work of Mormon literature, the theme of premortality is represented by the character of Jake Sully, whose human spirit/consciousness enters a new body. He is given a plan before he enters that body, but he decides to go against that plan. For Jake, premortality eventually becomes a distant memory as he merges fully with his new body. This film obviously approaches the theme differently than Nephi Anderson's book. The cosmic nature of premortality is represented by hulking spaceships and ultra advanced technology. By contrast, Anderson uses mostly vague descriptions of celestial scenery. Both concepts are hard to comprehend for viewers, and can be taken as symbolic representations rather than actual depictions of premortality.

The play Gaia also follows the theme of premortality, centered around the spirits of Satan and Eve. This interpretation is minimalistic, the play is a simple conversation, before the sides have been evenly split. The ambiguity here is centered around who Lucifer was and who Eve was. Both are characters that are not often given character and personality in Mormon theology. Lucifer is usually portrayed as simply evil, and Eve as primarily a mother. This play makes Eve the primary architect of the Earth, and makes Lucifer an intellectual worried about the nature of free will, concerned about how the Father could even think of sending His children someplace they might not succeed. This humanization of abstract concepts in Mormon theology plays a different role in helping the audience to understand premortality: rather than detached storytelling or dazzling visual effects, the simple conversation can be taken as a metaphor for the essence of spirit, which is intelligence.

All three of these works speak to the idea of premortality, but the different genres and aims of each work makes them a unique part of a collective Mormon consciousness about premortal life.

Jer3miah Response Post

I sat down last night to watch Jer3miah with my husband. The opening episode, with its shaky camera, and cringy Mormon mom-and-dad conversation had us squirming. We had very different responses to the rest of the series though. David eventually fell asleep, while I got sucked in. At about hour 1, though, I began to feel a little weary myself. I still didn't know who Jeremiah's birth parents were, who the people chasing him were, and what the heck was inside that box!

Needless to say, at the end of this 2-hour endeavor, I was disappointed to find that only one of my questions would be answered. It struck me as a bit of a cop-out, honestly. Jeremiah's dad is one of the three Nephites?

Despite my personal disappointment with the resolution of the suspense, the fact that I even cared to know the answers to these questions shows a fairly successful attempt at a Mormon drama. The short episodes were nice, breaking things up into little chunks. The themes of family and adoption were especially poignant. I actually had a conversation earlier that day about lineage with a woman I taught on my mission. She is concerned because she doesn't have a house of Israel listed in her patriarchal blessing, but is told only that she belongs to the house of Abraham. I connected Jeremiah's struggle to find his identity with hers, and found a lot of similarities.

All in all, Jer3miah was an interesting experiment, and it was fun to watch despite the low film quality.

Jer3miah

Before I began watching Jer3miah, I had an image in my head of what I thought the series was going to be like—the actual series was nothing like I thought it would be. To admit, I was very confused at first, trying to put the puzzle pieces together. I wondered if its goal was doing a more in-depth adaptation of Joseph Smith, but then after he received the box and was given three “commandments”, I realized their goal wasn’t so much of an identical story of Joseph Smith, but more of what the review suggested about focusing on LDS themes. During the video, when Jeremiah is going to the place no one was supposed to know about, throughout the scene, I thought about some of the struggles Joseph Smith had to go through. Then there was the encounter with the man, and I paralleled it with Nephi, when he has to slay Laban—the video even quoted Isaiah 55, when the Lord talks about how our ways are not His—the experience would’ve been very traumatic to Nephi as it was something he had never done nor thought about doing; the video portrayed it very different than current Church videos portray the experience with Nephi. Another aspect I found interesting is after Claire and Jeremiah get kidnapped: in the following episode, it references Abraham’s trial, which I didn’t connect until after it was brought up. I find it interesting that the series was able to make modern-day parallels with scripture stories (even though some of them are a little farfetched.

Jer3miah Video Post

I thought the movie was really interesting in the fact that it used so many LDS references to create the entire plot and theme. To be honest, it was hard for me to watch because of some cringe acting and dialog, but I thought the overall production was decent - it reminded me of a final project or capstone for graduation. I didn't realize how odd the stories and beliefs can be and what it causes some people to do - listening to the voice of God. I find it interesting that my blog before this one I talked about recreating the book of Mormon and having Hollywood do it for dramatization. I think if the Book of Mormon, or LDS beliefs in general were depicted accurately, I'm not sure how well it would be accepted. This story of the 3 Nephites and their genealogy was an interesting take that i hadn't recognized before. I do agree with some of the point Professor Burton included in his analysis and it is very apparent in Jer3miah the interconnectedness of our beliefs, history, genealogy, etc.

Final Essay - Hollywood Movie: The Book of Mormon

Although I was exposed to a lot more LDS literature than I ever have been (at least works outside the church cannon) I feel there are a lot of genres, topics or approaches that I am not familiar with or haven’t encountered within LDS literature or LDS creative arts. With that said, I feel that a Hollywood interpretation of the Book of Mormon would be very interesting, and I believe it hasn’t been done. I say Hollywood, because that would allow for dramatization and exploration outside the book itself. Currently, there is a production from the Church remaking the Book of Mormon, but its audience seems to draw towards those already familiar with the gospel and principles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. Many would possibly agree that a misrepresentation of the Book of Mormon and its stories could be harmful to the Church; however, I would disagree. I think any exposure to the Book of Mormon is a move in the right direction, even if directors produce such pieces as try to and demean the religion – they’ve tried and failed before with the Book of Mormon Broadway.

I would suggest that each book or so within the Book of Mormon be made into a series as to include many of the events and elements. I understand that Hollywood doesn’t do justice to many book-to-movie productions, but if there was a very well-done production, I think it would have an incredible impact on the story. Yes, there are areas that would be considered ‘R’ rated, but this future historical fiction film has enough action, romance, etc. that would draw the attention of many outside the Church. Although a Hollywood version would bring in a lot more fiction, attention to the book could also draw curiosity. I am not implying that the movie be created for the sole purpose of missionary efforts, but I think the stories hold incredible accounts that are often misrepresented or misunderstood because of lack of dramatization.

As a subgroup to LDS creative arts and literature, I feel that many of our films are directed towards LDS audiences. My question is, what if we (or someone outside the church) created them for a general audience? Movies such as Exodus, Prince of Egypt, The Passion of Christ, and Noah have all expanded on Biblical stories – some with more success than others. Many audiences are familiar with these stories which may be the cause of success or failure for each of them, but the Book of Mormon could be displayed in a manner that doesn’t focus on a Mormon audience. Imagine exciting trailers retelling the Book of Mormon – I think it would be an interesting form of media that hasn’t been done before – well at least, not quite like Hollywood.

Literature: Creating Commonality and Meaning

It is so important that we, as members of the church, are literary. Literature creates a space of shared meaning and commonality which is important for us in a general context, within our own faith tradition, and within ourselves. Literature allows us to work through our ideas and thoughts and shared them with others. One of the things that was particular impactful for me, was our conversation we had about the relationship between the early church and literature. I loved that we studied different works of literature and that we wanted "our own Miltons." Through this class I feel like I have gained a much greater understanding of the place that literature has in our own faith tradition. 

I first think the literature is important to us, because it helps us connect to others. Currently, I am an English teaching major, but before this I strongly considered teaching math. I loved math and am much better at it then English. Ultimately though I decided to go with English, because I wanted to be able to teach morals and value to my students. In a lot of ways, literature is the religion of the modern world. I feel like literature is a way that we can bridge gaps between us and our brothers and sisters who have different beliefs than ours. I feel like F. Scott Fitzgerald put it best when he said, "That is part of the beauty of all literature. You discover that your longer are universal longings, that you're not lonely and isolated from anyone. You belong." When I feel those connections that Fitzgerald explained, I am reminded that we all a part of the family of God. 

One example of this that I found in our class was Martine Leavitt's My Book of Life by Angel. This book was woven with threads of LDS thoughts and theology. Like our unique ideas about the fall, our belief in guardian angels, and the belief that God answer's prayers. Yet it connected with people of all faiths and ideologies. It allowed us together to explore hard topics and an ugly issue that exists in our world right now. As we strive to connect with the world around us, I feel like literature is a way we can do it. 

I feel like literature can connect us as members of the Church of Jesus Christ as well. The greatest example of this would be the Book of Mormon, of course, which is the keystone that keeps us all together. However other texts can do that for us as well. In some of my research for my job, I have looked through Exponents magazines (which we looked at in class too) and it was interesting to see how important that those were to them at that time. Women of the church really felt connect through those magazines. I also feel like Darlene Young's Homespun and Angel Feathers is another great example of this. Her poem "Utah Mormon" really resonated with me and in that moment I realized I wasn't alone in the feelings I was feeling. I also think that the Happy Little Secrets play demonstrated a different aspect of this, because it was a safe way for us to work through difficult aspects of our beliefs. 

Continuing this theme that it helps us to connect to each other, I think it also helps us to rethink ideas we already know and believe. The doctrine of the gospel is unchanging, so I feel like are focus is on deepening our understanding of it, instead of widening it. When we are able to work through the cliques in our language and find new analogies and metaphors, we are "all edified together." I really enjoyed Dr. Burton's "Creativity and New media Mormonism" speech, because he did that within his speech and also explained the concept of continually finding awe in the gospel. I think we have an obligation to use literature to explore our own faith and then share that with others. 

Finally, I feel like literature helps us to connect with ourselves. Another impactful moment for me in this class was when Ashley Mae Holiand came to class. She talked about how she tried to just write for herself. Then she talked about how she is writing about her experience with an illness as she is experiencing the illness. It was clear that writing was a way that she processed life and tried to understand the world around her. Then we had that class conversation and activity where we explored the idea that writing can help us process doubts and problems we have. I feel like this class has really helped me to understand that concept and idea. I have an increased desire to write my experiences and share my thoughts and ideas through literary means. 

From this class, I learned that literature really does plays an important part in our faith tradition. We need to have it to connect us to the world around us, to others and to ourselves. My all time favorite quote from this semester was something Darlene Young said. I probably am not going to get it exactly, but she said we write not to get to a destination, but to allow someone to have an experience. The gospel, for me, is all about the experiences that we have in this life. Repentance is a change of perspective, and I think literature helps us to accomplish that. 

The Importance to being Literary

An answer to Gideon Burton's first question:

When I began this class, I imagined a class that focused on the standard works of the church, then focusing the remainder of the class readings on foundations literature: journal entries and spiritual accounts from the early saints. We focused on this a little, noting especially in Grant Hardy’s editions of the Book of Mormon, that Nephi writes his journal entries in a “personal narrative” fashion. Our LDS Christian literary beginnings were founded upon what was written in the Book of Mormon. This led to sermons, another key element to our literary tradition. We believe that in speaking, the Holy Ghost can carry the truth of what we say into the hearts of the listeners, such as in Joseph Smith’s “King Follett’s Discourse" and 1 Nephi 33:1. When the Church was formed, it was difficult to be literary because people were being moved so frequently and life was more about survival than careful, reflective thinking.

A pivotal moment for me was understanding the different literary LDS Christian periods, outlined in Eugene England’s essay which explain the different periods from “Foundations,” to “Home Literature” to “The Lost Generation,” and concluding with “Faithful Realism.” The way that writing from church members has evolved over the years – from Orson Whitney’s cry for Miltons/Shakespeares of our own and Nephi Anderson’s Added Upon, to Terry Tempest William, Refuge, to more modern science fiction, drama, and poetry – is quite remarkable. The endeavor to be literary, reading and writing LDS literature, encourages future generations to create, reflect, and ponder on difficult issues. I have learned that the ability to remember history, and work through difficult doctrinal questions, practice bold journal writing, and stretch my LDS Christian vocabulary, in turn, opens the door, for myself and LDS Christians, to grow in faith and give place for the Holy Ghost to more fully influence our lives.