Comments on: Tab A, slot B

By: MoJo

MoJo — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 04:57:46 +0000

I think what really knocked me for a loop was that the phrases “Mormon bishop’s wife” and “vampire” and “pushing every moral boundary” on the back of the book didn’t clue some people in.

I COULD NOT BELIEVE the number of LDS readers I saw across the web who claimed to NOT KNOW that vampire = sex.

(Which is one reason I think Edward Cullen is so damned attractive to the LDS 30-/40-something XX set. Meyer created the ultimate vampire for those who don’t know that vampire = sex. That grown LDS women could swoon over Edward and call for Eugene’s temple recommend at the same time is just mindboggling.)

By: chosha

chosha — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 15:35:59 +0000

I honestly can’t fathom that people were scandalised by that book (Angel Falling Softly). I mean there’s conservative and then there’s just plain ludicrous. I think some people expect LDS writers to create stories where everyone is valiant and believing and made happy by the same things as everyone around them. They want the only conflicts to be external and caused by nothing or no-one LDS. Not only is that kind of story unrealistic and not believeable – it’s also incredibly boring.

By: MoJo

MoJo — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 02:18:15 +0000

Geez, we’re racking them up.

Thanks, chosha. I’m really not into ambushing people, as I’ve been ambushed and hated it.

And then there’s Eugene’s book where people felt they were ambushed, but they were just not paying attention.

By: chosha

chosha — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 02:10:49 +0000

I made it past the first page, and I’m still LDS…technically. I would’ve read the book even when I was a practising Mormon, but I’m not surprised that others don’t. And I don’t think it’s the subject matter that scares them away. I think a lot of LDS would love to read an honest novel with characters who recognise that the human animal is still an animal and that sexual instincts/relationships are complex, strong and don’t necessarily fit people’s image of niceness in the LDS world. They just don’t necessarily want the sex delivered to them in such overtly (and deliberately) vulgar language. LDS who will relate to or like that kind of in-your-face fuckery are a subset of the people who will respond to a novel where LDS characters struggle with (or abandon) their values in relation to sex. And they are a subset of the people who would welcome a book about LDS characters dealing with sexual issues in general.

I actually appreciated the first paragraph for that reason. I think it sends an immediate warning to the (LDS) reader that this may not be their kind of book, despite the professed religion of most of the main characters.

By: MoJo

MoJo — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 01:27:03 +0000

I’m so sorry, S.E. I think of you more as a Diva than a member.

Giselle never lost hers. She just decided to take a different route for a while. As for Bryce, you’ll have to wait until MAGDALENE. 😉

By: elysepatrice

elysepatrice — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 01:25:14 +0000

I guess I’m number three, then, but you already knew that. and being a single LDS female, I can relate to Giselle in may ways (except for the bits about how she’s like a ninja. I will never be that fit.). I’m still holding out for your snippet(s) of her and Bryce getting active in church again and rediscovering their faith. :o)

By: Th.

Th. — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 00:50:14 +0000

How did you come to buy it, Franch? And has your wife read it?

By: MoJo

MoJo — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:57:38 +0000

Wow, thanks for coming back to tell me.

Obviously, each reader experiences these people in a different way, and it’s always interesting to me to find out what resonated and what didn’t.

I will tell you, however, that the Jep Industries takeover (I hope you remember, where Hollander Steelworks absorbed it piecemeal) is the core of the conflict in Mitch Hollander’s book (book 3, MAGDALENE). If you liked/understood Bryce’s struggle, I think you’ll really like Mitch’s. He’s a widowed bishop (I know, I’m stretching that one to breaking point).

I hope you catch the vignettes. They’re just little insights here and there, stuff I wrote to solidify their characters in my mind.

And thanks again. I really can’t tell you how much I appreciate it. 🙂

By: The Franchise

The Franchise — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:44:52 +0000

Sebastian and Eilis didn’t resonate with me like the other characters did. The conflict Bryce, Giselle, and Knox each felt about sex and religion was something I could relate to. I don’t relate to Justice much, and Eilis is very distant. Sebastian… I’m not sure why I don’t really like him. As you made clear, he’s ADHD and OCD, which are quite comprehensible to me, but he wasn’t someone I could enjoy.

I really felt like I could have skipped over Sebastian and Eilis and enjoyed the book just as much, without missing much of the plot, either.

Oh, and their sex is less compelling. 🙂

By: MoJo

MoJo — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:22:20 +0000

Thank you. 🙂

(I’m DYING to know which one wasn’t, and why the other two were useful. DYING, I tell you!)