0 likes

   0 likes

   0 likes

   0 likes

Jonathan has been attacked by some of them in unexpected ways, such as trying to discredit him by aggressively psychoanalyzing him personally through the novel.

Maybe he’s not talking about me. After all, there’s no way he can claim that my remarks were “unexpected”. Let me quote for you the email I sent them way back when I read the novel as a manuscript, when Christopher Bigelow was soliciting opinions on whether or not to publish it:

Hi Christopher and Jonathan,

I just finished reading the novel “No Going Backward” and here are my comments:

Overall it’s an interesting and engaging story. I read it straight through even though I’m very busy at the moment. You’ve done a good job of illustrating the difficulty of Paul’s situation and his pain.

It seems like a good choice for Zarahemla books since — with all of the focus on Proposition 8, etc., in the LDS community — I think there are a lot of Mormons out there who would be interested in a story that illustrates how to be supportive of homosexual Mormons without supporting homosexuality. The story feels very pedagogical in that respect, but it’s a selling point.

I wouldn’t recommend it as something to give non-members to help them understand the Mormon position, though, since it really doesn’t make the Mormon position seem reasonable, noble, or sympathetic. In particular, given that the Mormon position on gay marriage is supposed to be based on protecting traditional marriage, the story gives an incredibly negative portrait of marriage. It reminds me of the Mormon attitude towards the 3-hour block: it’s theoretically possible you might like it, but probably not, and that’s not the point anyway — it’s a commandment. I see no evidence in the story of any straight man actually wanting to spend time with his wife or girlfriend; they have to be bullied or guilted into it. Actually, the treatment of female characters throughout the story is rather patronizing and dismissive.

I think it could use some (fairly minor) editing throughout:
* The teenagers’ personalities seemed too similar to me. No matter who was talking, the dialogs seemed to have the same structure where they have a short exchange on a serious topic and then they crack a joke or talk about video games to lighten the mood. It seems like you want to be writing the serious stuff, but then think, “I have to break here from the serious stuff since I’m writing teenagers — I have to do a teenager thing now.”
* I realize Paul is the main character, but sometimes the focus on Paul was a little over-the-top, especially when Chad was at a dance thinking about girls and suddenly wonders whether that’s how Paul feels when looking at boys. I mean, does this kid have his own life, or what?
* The perpetual feud between the bishop and his wife gets a little repetitive and could probably be edited down.
* The lit folks will probably complain about the frequent shifts in perspective and about the lack of physical description. I didn’t find those aspects to be a big problem, but I suspect the literary purists will mark you a few demerits for them.
* It’s a little odd that it’s called “No Going Backward” given that the resolution of the story is for Paul to go back into the closet.

About me? I’m a 37-year-old happily married mom with two adorable boys (ages 5 and 7), and I’m a cultural Mormon atheist.

Keep up the good work, and good luck on the next phase of your project!

Carol

   0 likes

It made me wonder — do they also think it was some sort of inappropriate stretch that I assumed Langford was Mormon?

The thing that’s such a sad irony is that it’s a book about how faithful keeping-the-law-of-chastity-type Mormons shouldn’t be hated and ostracized for being gay. Sadly, he doesn’t seem to believe his own message.

OTOH, Chris’s “aggressively psychoanalyzing him” claim may refer to the fact that I pointed out that the book is misogynist and promotes a misogynistic worldview. But that point doesn’t require any psychoanalysis — that’s in the text itself.

   0 likes

in the bizarre alternate reality where being gay is a big ol’ nasty, nasty taint. You know, the bizarre reality where it’s a step in the wrong direction to let people exercise their free agency–and still grant them fair treatment when they use that free agency to do something LDS doctrine doesn’t sanction. The bizarre reality where “Satan’s plan” of forcing everyone to live a particular way is condemned as REALLY IMMORAL, despite the fact that people like Chris Bigelow would, if they could, force everyone to live a particular way, at least when it comes to being gay, which is so awful that free agency doesn’t really apply to it.

THAT bizarre alternate reality–aka, the bizarre reality of the TBM.

   0 likes

In what bizarre alternate reality does it “discredit” an author to say that he clearly knows what he’s talking about? My point was merely that he exposed the gay-male-faithful-patriarch perspective even more completely and accurately than he had perhaps intended to.

   0 likes

LOL, yep, I rasseled him down and strapped him to the analyst’s couch so he’d have no choice but to spill his secret resentment of women (and marriage) all over those pages…

   0 likes

http://ckbigelow.blogspot.com/2009/12/literary-balm-for-gay-dilemma.html

   0 likes