The latest from exmo-lit's master of suspense: Behind Closed Doors by Natalie R. Collins

This January will bring us another exciting thriller from the exmo community's own Natalie R. Collins!!!

The same author that wrote the unforgettable Wives and Sisters has a brand-new novel about to hit the shelves: Behind Closed Doors!!! This new novel is a complex mystery that kept me in suspense right up to the end. And it was scary enough that it actually gave me a nightmare!!!

Since murder mysteries aren't my specialty, I was a little worried when I picked up this book that it might just be a reworking of the same material as Natalie's earlier novel. After all, how much can you do with a Mormon-themed murder mystery?

Oh me of little faith!!! ;^)

It should have been obvious to me that LDS culture is rich enough to provide plenty of different situations for setting up a dark and shadowy thriller. And Collins has done a great job here of exploring a different segment of the LDS community and different facets of Mormon doctrine to create a new mystery with an original flavor.

In terms of criticism of Mormonism, Collins' earlier novel (Wives and Sisters, discussed here and here) dealt with the fact that repentant abusers are sometimes shielded by the church hierarchy and hence given the opportunity to strike again. In her new novel (Behind Closed Doors), Collins explores the theme of how LDS victims of date rape are affected by the teaching (especially from S. W. Kimball's The Miracle of Forgiveness) that one should fight to the death rather than "lose one's virtue" by being raped.

Now some of you are probably thinking that this must be some sort of anti-Mormon book. Well, that depends on your definition of anti-Mormon. It is certainly not complementary to Mormonism. The protagonists are Mormon apostates and the villains are Mormons. The book portrays domestic violence taking place in LDS homes.

However, this time the author was careful to explicitly state (I think twice) that domestic violence exists in every type of community and isn't something unique to Mormonism. Reading Natalie's blog I can't help but think she spelled it out this time because she was tired of getting angry emails from Mormons accusing her of portraying Mormonism as having some sort of monopoly on evil, abusive people.

Really I think it's more that the author's specialty is suspenseful thrillers -- which require evil villains by definition -- and she sets them in Mormon country because, well, write what you know. And it's not as if nothing bad ever happens in LDS communities...

The point I think has the most potential to offend LDS readers is that the novel opens with the main character in the temple thinking about how she'd been freaked out and traumatized by her first experience with the endowment ceremony. I've never been through the temple myself (except baptisms for the dead of course) so I'm not sure if her description of the ceremony is sufficiently detailed to qualify as "anti-Mormon." But from what I've read of people's temple experiences on exmo blogs (and even on LDS blogs really), I think her character's reaction to the ceremony isn't so far-fetched as to be unrealistic.

Even so, the fact that the book contains a negative perspective on the endowment ceremony is probably enough to make this book offensive to some Mormons. So I'm glad she put it right at the beginning so that if you're going to be offended by the book, you can get your shot of righteous indignation from the very first chapter -- indeed the first line -- and then put the book down. That's much better than having to read the whole book, getting angrier and angrier as you go, until by the end you're so pissed-off that you can't help but send Natalie one of those "Why are you so mean and angry?" emails. If you do that, all that will come of it is that Natalie will find your message amusing, and she'll post it in full to her blog surrounded by wry comments. And really, you don't want to waste your time (and Natalie's) on such a pointless exercise. Actually, if you think you'd be offended by reading about someone being spooked by the temple ceremony, then do yourself a favor and don't even pick up this book at all.

One detail from this book that really jumped out as hilarious was the fact that the author created a male apostate character who has the misfortune of being named Moroni. The reason this detail made me literally laugh out loud was that the exact same ironic detail -- an apostate guy saddled with the name Moroni -- makes an appearance in D. Michael Martindale's new book Brother Brigham!!!

It just goes to show that "Mormon Literature" and "post-Mormon Literature" are really just two faces of the same thing -- two different real, human, valid views of the exact same culture.

It hit me that because Mormon lit and anti-Mormon lit are two totally separate and unrelated categories -- everywhere except on my blog ;-) -- I think it's very likely that I may be the only person in the world at this moment who has read both of these hot new books on the Mormon lit scene: Brother Brigham on the faithful side of the Mo-lit divide (discussed here) and Behind Closed Doors representing the apostate side. Yay me!!! :D

Now you're probably wondering how it came to be that I've already read Behind Closed Doors since it doesn't come out until January 2, 2007.

So, would you like the true version or the improved and embellished version? ;-)

The true version is that with this photo I won in the "farthest away" category of Natalie's book-sighting contest. And when she wrote me to ask what book I would like as my prize, I asked her to send me one of her own novels, so she sent me a coveted "advance reading copy" of this new book.

The improved and embellished version is that I'm one of those influential, trend-setting, book-reviewing bloggers that publishers like to send their advance reading copies to!!!

Yep, I'm really moving up in the blogs-about-books world!!!

Fictionally speaking. ;-)

The Mo thriller vs. the post-Mo thriller: The Pictograph Murders by P. G. Karamesines and Wives and Sisters by Natalie R. Collins

I just got done reading two exciting murder mysteries, one by a practicing Mormon and one by a former Mormon.

I'm not really a murder mystery person, so I was really glad that neither one of these books followed the classic "whodunit?" formula where the reader is invited to see the entire novel as an exercise in trying to figure out who the culprit is right up until the end when the hero unveils the answer. In both of these novels it was clear fairly early on which character was the dangerous bad guy who needed to be brought to justice, and the mystery was essentially in unveiling the details of his crimes and situation. Both were stories of a strong, independent female character who is observed and stalked by a man who has developed a sinister interest in her.

The contrast that really took me by surprise, however, was that in the mystery by the apostate author, the hero was an exmormon/apostate and the villain was a devout Mormon, whereas in the mystery written by a Mormon, it turned out that the hero was a faithful Mormon and the villain was an atheist.

Hahahahahahahahahaha!!! Just kidding -- that didn't surprise me at all. In fact it was exactly what I was expecting before I cracked open either one of these two books.

P. G. Karamesines novel The Pictograph Murders has a little bit of an "outsider looking in" feel to it when discussing LDS culture. The author -- like her main character -- converted to Mormonism as an adult, and it shows in the perspective she describes. Not that her description of LDS culture is an inaccurate or invalid perspective -- far from it -- but rather she doesn't portray her character as having the homey, everyday familiarity with the trappings of Mormon culture that I've encountered in most of the LDS literature I've read.

Actually, there is very little Mormonism at all in Karamesines' novel. The main character describes converting to Mormonism as part of a rebirth following the end of an abusive relationship. But her philosophy and lifestyle aren't typically LDS. If the story weren't set in Mormon country, one could swap Mormonism for another religion here without losing much. The only scene I noticed that stood out as uniquely Mormon was the one where some characters are discussing whether some other people are LDS or not and admit to looking for garment lines as an indicator.

I caught myself wondering whether it would have made more sense if the main character had been an adherent of the Navajo religion since the author's description of the tribal folktales is so thoughtful and heartfelt. However, on reflection I feel like the fact that the story was told by a mainstream (anglo) perspective added to the magic of wondering if there isn't really something to the traditional tales. Even the bad guy character -- who is also anglo and seems from some statements to be an atheist -- is shown to have some belief in Native American mysticism.

Karamesines employs a fun device of writing parts of the story metaphorically as folk tales, having mythical figures stand in for the characters. The bad guy in particular seems to like to view himself as being like the coyote god. This technique is not merely entertaining, it also creates an atmosphere of bringing the past and present together surrounding the archaeological dig that the main characters are working on throughout the novel.

One part I found a little confusing was an extended dialog about moral relativism which begins on page 242. The bad guy sets up an interesting philosophical question by pointing out that people of the culture the archaeologists are studying would see the archaeological dig as grave desecration, no better than the thieving activities of the freelance "pot-hunters" who dig up artifacts to sell on the black market. Then this is compared to the situation of a coyote hunting a rabbit in which each has a different view of what is a positive outcome.

This scenario touches on a strong case to suggest that there exist conflicts in which it doesn't make sense to say that one party is in the right and the other is in the wrong. In the coyote/rabbit situation -- although one's sympathies are likely with the rabbit who is at risk of death -- in reality if the rabbits win every time the coyotes will starve to death, which is probably more painful than being eaten, and may even ultimately have negative consequences for the rabbit population. Karamesines' characters reply to this point by launching into a debate over the philosophy of "might makes right," but to be honest, it wasn't clear to me if the main bad guy was advocating a philosophy in which the strong deserve to be victorious, or whether they all accepted that "might makes right" is wrong and were merely arguing whether moral relativism inherently leads to a situation of "might makes right." To me this seems like an irrelevant argument. I have always thought the phrase "might makes right" is meant to be taken ironically to mean that the stronger party will win regardless of whether he is in the right for real.

That point aside, Karamesines creates a compelling tension between her hero and her villain. And as you already know if you follow her posts on the blog A Motley Vision, she has a great skill in capturing the emotion of appreciating being surrounded by nature.

Natalie R. Collins' novel Wives and Sisters is significantly darker and more gruesome. Her villain makes Karamesines' villain look like a charming and lovable guy. Seriously.

Collins' novel captures the constant overwhelming terror inherent in being stalked by someone who is delusional and dangerous. A few of the details of things her villain does to deliberately terrorize the protagonist were realistic to the point of compelling me to go back and review and compare with a real-life memoir that I don't normally like to talk that much about in a comedic column such as this one.

Unlike Karamesines' novel, Collins' novel is set in an atmosphere of constant and pervasive Mormon culture and theology. Indeed, in her story Mormonism is the true culprit, creating the madness at the root of the horrible crimes and abuses she describes. I know that faithful Mormons will vehemently object to this portrayal, however it is clear that Collins is describing Mormon culture from her own experience and from her own particular perspective as someone who grew up in Mormonism.

I enjoyed both of these books, and I would recommend them both with the small caveat that if you are a believing Mormon, you will almost certainly not like Natalie R. Collins' portrait of Mormonism.