I just read the new novel by Jacquelyn Mitchard, a best-selling, former Oprah writer, titled Cage of Stars. This attracted my attention because the novel is about an LDS family in southern Utah whose two young daughters are murdered. The main focus of the book is the oldest daughter, Veronica (Ronnie), who is almost thirteen at the time of the murders, and her actions and behavior over the next four years, particularly as her parents come to a point of forgiveness of the murderer while she continues to harbor feelings of vengeance. Here are excerpts from some of the professional reviews:

Ronnie progresses from a stock girl-next-door type to a young woman with considerable emotional depth, and Mitchard understatedly portrays her attempts to navigate romance and other interactions as a Mormon raised very "of the Church." The results are sweet and solid. (Publisher's Weekly)

Family catastrophes are Mitchard's stock-in-trade, and the latest novel from the best-selling, Oprah-anointed author of The Deep End of the Ocean (1996) is no exception.... There is some calculated emotional manipulation here, and some of the characters are overly idealized. Nevertheless, Mitchard tells a compelling, even suspenseful, story; skillfully crafts an authentic narrative voice, and succeeds in humanizing the adherents of a religion that still suffers from widespread negative stereotypes. (Booklist)

Mitchard is not LDS and although she credits a Mormon friend for helping her with the ins and outs of Mormonism, I found many of her LDS references were slightly "off." She confuses temples and tabernacles; refers to "the Father" (instead of Heavenly Father); talks about primary (lower-case p) as if it was the equivalent of elementary school; calls members "Brother" and "Sister" followed by their first name instead of surname; has a father taking his newborn son to the temple to be sealed while mother stays at home (presumably this couple was previously married in the temple), etc.

Interestingly, on Amazon.com, Mitchard has several posts about the book, and admits,

"There were, however, incorrect things about Mormons in the novel. A few got in because it's almost impossible to write about Mormons without being one; but a few were deliberate -- an attempt not to exploit the private ritual of the religion and a few because my plot demanded a little wiggle room. This is, after all, fiction."

From my perspective, even if it is fiction Mitchard is discussing a real religion with real adherents, and how many non-Mormons who read this book will think that all Mormons act and talk this way?

But then Mitchard made some comments I found very interesting, particularly in light of [my sister] Kate's comments about all the anti-Christians [she's encountered in her graduate program], and also in regards to Sunday's Relief Society lesson on missionary work, where several people said that they try to talk about religion without mentioning denominations because that immediately puts up a barrier.

One woman described having a religious discussion that she felt was going very well but when the other participant learned she was LDS, put an immediate end to it--absolutely refused to talk any further because she'd heard such "bad" things about Mormons (none of which she could specify). Another family refused to let their child play with an LDS child because of his religion. And this is in supposedly enlightened New York State? Mitchard says,

"But somehow, it's open season on Mormons -- and the press dearly loves to gossip about them. And Mormons are as uncomfortable with people believing that they still practice polygamy as Catholics are with the allegation that ALL priests have abused children. It's just not true. If anyone were to make the kind of derogatory remarks about any other ethnic or religious group that they make about Mormons, righteous people would object. When we mock the Mormons, people stand silent. I wonder why."

Looks like we have a defender of the faith, at least!

-----------------------------------

Ann Woodbury Moore
May 18, 2006