Because I don't have a TV (I know, how prehistoric) and am unlikely to go out of my way to find someone with HBO to check out the show, I was wondering if anyone saw it and get their takes on it.
Sergeant
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
I always check out HBO series when they make it to DVD. To me, the series are the only reason to have HBO, and there aren't enough of them to justify the price. I certainly wouldn't subscribe for the movies. Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I saw it.
My hubby called it "The longest hour of TV ever" but I kinda liked it.
It made me uncomfortable... But then, so did Six Feet Under a lot of the time.
I'll probably watch it next week... Alone.
Pix
Posted by Sergeant (Member # 8749) on :
What aspects made it uncomfortable?
I am intersted in how they portray polygamy, because in my experience depending on where it is practiced the practice of polygamy and how it affects the lives of those involved can vary widely.
Sergeant
Posted by Chris Kidd (Member # 2646) on :
Heres something From the The Back Bench at Nauvoo site.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
It made me uncomfortable because of the hectic way in which they lived. The man was pulled in every which-a-way and the women, (who you'd think would have an easier time with 3 to split the load) were overwhelmed with their vast numbers of children.
But then, my hubby and I were both from small families. Maybe someone from a big family would think that wasn't so bad...
Also, I think one reason I liked it more than my husband is that he had *no* point of reference for these people. He's a nice Jewish boy raised in California by North Eastern Liberal parents. I come from a state, though far from (Utah? NM?) in distance, very much like it in culture. That is, the Christian God was very important to me and most of the people I knew growing up. So I could relate better, especially to the little girl working at "Deb's Burger".
What I didn't like, from a storytelling point of view, was the way we were thrown into their troubles before we got to know them. I would have rather learned about the characters good points before we saw the cracks. Instead, we opened with the cracks, and hopefully, we'll see later why we should like these people and why their lifestyle should be saved.
As for how they lived... They kept refering to themselves *A* family. But they really didn't seem like a family to me. They had 3 houses with a common back yard, and each woman ran the household of their own house. In that, they seemed more like a Siamese-Triplet family, Joined at the Man and Wallet.
I got the feeling that their "love" was really simply "tolerance" and a barely sustainable tolerance at that. No one seemed happy.
Well, that was longer and more meandering than I had planned...
Pix
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
Pixiest, thanks for the information. I'm intrigued now. But I'll be waiting for the DVD.
Chris Kidd- I read the article you linked too. I don't entirely understand the guy's concern about Big Love. I would think that being in the spotlight would make more people want to learn more about Mormons and from that you'd get the people who don't believe as well as the people who want to convert. What's the big deal? His concerns about Semptember Dawn make more sense.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:Okay, I'll admit it. I loved The Da Vinci Code. And I loved Angels and Demons too. In my opinion, Dan Brown deserves every buck he's made. He's an incredible author. And good authors deserve to be read.
Here is what I don't understand. I thought The Da Vinci Xode was juvenile. Dan Brown deserves every penny he has made, but I don't think that it means that he is a great author or that those were great books. The characters were caricatures, shallow and uninteresting. The characters had the appearance of depth because Brown kept a tight lid on all of the information concerning them, and then doled out the information to maintain the appearance of depth.
The prose was quick, which isn't itself a sin, but the book was written in such a way that one would believe that the movie came first.
I'm happy that people are reading the book, or any book, but I get confused when people call The Da Vinci Code a great book or Dan Brown a great author.
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
"I read the article you linked too. I don't entirely understand the guy's concern about Big Love."
The guys concern, as well as my own, is that people might not try to think past the first thought they have when watching the show: "This is the Mormon culture. Mormons are crazy."
I do give people the benefit of a doubt, that they will understand that this is not the LDS lifestyle, this is not how things are out in Utah. But for someone who only has heard the stereotypes of the culture, this is going to reinforce them.
I conceed, though, that people do practice polygamy in Utah. I understand that those people must have lives, and if I were to try to portray them, would I do it any differently? Do they live any differently than what was shown?
I never met anyone who practiced it. I never knew anyone who met anyone who practiced it.
There are tons of shows out there where groups claim they are reinforcing negative or untrue stereotypes. This is going to be one of them, and the first I know of that centers around the area and culture I am familiar with.
The only part in the show where the LDS church is represented is the interaction between the daughter and the other girl at the resteraunt, pretty much pointing out that "the family" is not going to church. But they have it done by a socially awkward 16+ year old girl.
And then we have a guy who marries a 15 year old, inviting the main dude to go to church with him, and calls other people in that crazy psycho town (which REALLY was a negative part), Brother and Sister, who, coincidently is muscling money out of the main guy.
The show is trying (and not really suceeding) to appease the church's side.
All I really want is for people to understand that this is not an accurate depiction of the Utah I know.
Sidenote: The scene with the girl in the resteraunt made me giggle. If you think about it, few people outside of the church have an idea what Miamaids and Laurels are.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"I would think that being in the spotlight would make more people want to learn more about Mormons and from that you'd get the people who don't believe as well as the people who want to convert."
Funny, I did not hear Mormon or Latter Day Saint mentioned once.
I liked the show, and will probably watch again.
I did feel uncomfortable, but not because of the sex. It was more, as The Pixiest said, about their general situation. I think I was supposed to feel uncomfortable in that way.
Once the show gets going, I think it will be a lot more just about people who are crazy and greedy and evil, like The Sopranos is about people who are sociopathic. Well, that's not a very good analogy. What I mean is, as the plot thickens, I believe we will care less about the family being Mormon, and more about the general intrigue of the show.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote: Funny, I did not hear Mormon or Latter Day Saint mentioned once.
I was only responding to that article's assertion that it would put Mormons in the spotlight.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Oh, Amanecer, I did not mean that the way it seems you think I meant it. I just did not hear any mention of religion at all. I have heard nothing about the show, and have read no articles.
(now remembering the restaurant scene T mentioned.)
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
Oh, I see. Sorry for the confusion.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
I didn't watch this because I agree with most of what was written in the article. I think that it's purposely invoking and sensationalizing a stereotype (and an incorrect one at that) for the sake of entertainment.
It's like why I hate Will and Grace. Specifically, I hate Grace. She's what many people think Jewish women are like - loud, neurotic, vulgar. The only time she's gone to shul (that I saw) is for her wedding (to a doctor, of course ). I am nothing like her, and neither are almost all of the other Jewish women I know.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
I haven't seen the show, and probably won't until it comes out on DVD. The worries expressed by Aaron Johnston are definitely real, but I have no way of knowing how much of an effect the show will have until I see it. My general opinion is that those who will walk away from the show with a more negative opinion of Mormons fit into 2 groups:
1. The ignorant(notice I didn't say stupid.) I meet people every day who really don't know squat about Mormons. If they see a show in which religious people in Utah with multiple wives are featured, 9 times out of 10 they'll assume they're Mormons. Maybe a little wacko, but Mormons nonetheless. The disclaimer does little to remedy this, since it only mentions that the church "officially" banned the practice, which opens the door to the possibility that it is still allowed in a more clandestine sense. I honestly don't think this was the producer's intent, but the statement can--and will--be read that way by some.
2. Those who already have an negative view of Mormons. There is little the church can do to convince these people of anything they refuse to be convinced of, so why worry about it?
I also agree that the Mountain Meadows movie has much more potential to do PR damage, so might I suggest to any Mormons who are reading this that they might want to brush up on their knowledge of the massacre? It is a blight on the LDS Chuch's history, but isn't, as some have suggested, an indication that religious people are by nature violent fundamentalists--see Krakhaur.
As for Dan Brown's novels, I liked both Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code, if only for their readability, but I can't help but think that many of his readers don't realize that it's FICTION, not history. Of course, Brown himself doesn't do much to encourage them to make the distinction.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
quote:It's like why I hate Will and Grace. Specifically, I hate Grace. She's what many people think Jewish women are like - loud, neurotic, vulgar.
I used to watch Will and Grace -- I'm sure I saw at least one whole season -- and I had no idea she was supposed to be Jewish.
Posted by johnsonweed (Member # 8114) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Funny, I did not hear Mormon or Latter Day Saint mentioned once.
They never mentioned it, but the allusions were certainly clear, particularly in the restaurant scene. Also, if you have ever travelled in Utah, the scenery on the way to the compound was unmistakable. I did not notice if the SUV had Utah plates.
My concerns about the show are the same as others above, namely that the writers gave us no time to get to know the characters before the conflicts start. Even Desperate Housewives gave introductions to the major characters (shallow as they are)
There was also a lot of emphasis on sex as if that was potentially the only benefit of a polygamous marriage for the man. I don't condone such arrangements, but it seems to me that a man and woman (women?) get married for love and I did not see a lot of that on the show. The only indication that he might love his wives was at the opening of the new store, but then they went right back to sex with the viagra humor.
All in all I'm not sure I'll keep watching for the whole season, but I'll give it a couple of more weeks to see if the story is really worth the time.
Posted by Dude Love (Member # 2437) on :
I'm right here! How can I help you?
Hello?
:: Re-reads thread title ::
Oh. Nevermind.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"They never mentioned it, but the allusions were certainly clear, particularly in the restaurant scene."
Maybe to you? I did not see any clear evidence of their religion. I know what I know about Mormons from reading threads here, really. I do know the stereotype of polygamy connected with the religion, but I know it is no longer the way it is.
So, as I watched, I was thinking that it was more of a community that was separate from society at large, not necessarily Mormon, but definitely strict in whatever code they lived by.
As I said, I read/knew nothing about this show except for watching a preview. I did not come out of the first watching knowing or assuming anything about Mormons.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
dkw and mrs M, I also watched Will and Grace for a few seasons and didn't know until she met that doctor Leo guy that she was jewish.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote:And then we have a guy who marries a 15 year old, inviting the main dude to go to church with him, and calls other people in that crazy psycho town (which REALLY was a negative part), Brother and Sister, who, coincidently is muscling money out of the main guy.
So is this an FLDS town? That makes sense, for some reason I thought it wasn't.
quote: If they see a show in which religious people in Utah with multiple wives are featured, 9 times out of 10 they'll assume they're Mormons.
Your concern seems to be that the broach the subject of Fundamentalist Mormons at all. Fundamentalist Mormonism is a subject that many people find interesting, myself included, simply because it's such a radically different life style from the norm. It's the same motivation that led me to be a tourist in Amish Country. It's just so different! I can understand your concerns, but it seems a little egocentric to not want a subject to be explored just because people might get it confused with something that is precious to you.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I watched half the show last night before I fell asleep. I will watch the other half tonight.
I think there is going to be some serious intrigue as time goes by.
Honest to goodness, I did not see anything negative towards the Mormons in the show by the way their lifestyle is presented. In fact, I still can't really tell what, if any, religion they are. They are, however, showing the negative feelings of some of the members of the larger community.
The mother(Bill's) is a frightening freak. The dad seems to be right up there with her. The Harry Dean Stanton character is increasingly scary.
I like it. I'm hooked.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I'm liking it more and more. I think the first episode was simply an opening flurry to set the mood. Now it's calmed down and we're onto the business of life and getting poisoned by one's religious leaders.
Bill mentions at one point that one of his wives "misses LDS" so it's implied that she, at least, was once mormon but left when the polygamy started.
I found it interesting that they implied that the women in the other polygamous marriage were bisexual...
Pix
Posted by johnsonweed (Member # 8114) on :
They are trying for too much shock and not spending enought time letting us get to know them.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
The Pixiest,
I did get a "used-to-be-LDS" idea tonight.
However, I still do not get the idea that it is getting down to the business of religious leaders' poisoning. I get that this one particular leader is really messed up and evil, that they are trying to break away, and that he has mafia-like hooks in them.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
OK, now the LDS stuff is there.
I did not like last night's show at all. (nothing to do with LDS, though I thought it was sort of corny when the psycho-mafia dad-Harry Dean Stanton-was doing the interview with the news, giving the tour of the museum, and showing all the LDS history. It just seemed to obvious to me as an audience-teaching tool. But I digress)
I did not believe some things.
I did not believe the whole birthday party scenario with Nickie. I did not believe that no one in the family would sing a song to a little boy, and leave her singing alone and looking like an idiot. I do not believe that they really love her, because she is a witch. I do not believe in Margie's young-and-stupid character, or that Bill would have accepted her as third wife.
So, if there is another show like last night, I might end my watching of it.
Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
quote:Originally posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong:
quote:Okay, I'll admit it. I loved The Da Vinci Code. And I loved Angels and Demons too. In my opinion, Dan Brown deserves every buck he's made. He's an incredible author. And good authors deserve to be read.
Here is what I don't understand. I thought The Da Vinci Xode was juvenile. Dan Brown deserves every penny he has made, but I don't think that it means that he is a great author or that those were great books. The characters were caricatures, shallow and uninteresting. The characters had the appearance of depth because Brown kept a tight lid on all of the information concerning them, and then doled out the information to maintain the appearance of depth.
The prose was quick, which isn't itself a sin, but the book was written in such a way that one would believe that the movie came first.
I'm happy that people are reading the book, or any book, but I get confused when people call The Da Vinci Code a great book or Dan Brown a great author.
Word.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
Disclaimer: I haven't seen any episodes- no HBO and my parents, who get 500 channels somehow also don't get HBO and thus can't TiVo it for me.
I've been pretty interested in this because the actresses who play two of my favorite characters from Veronica Mars have reoccurring roles. So I've been reading lots of articles on it, and episode recaps and stuff.
I've gotten the impression that a major theme is going to be the conflict between this family and the Mormon culture. For example, the oldest daughter befriends the Mormon daughter of a sheriff and the two girls have to deal with the fact that what her family is doing is both illegal and against Church law (I'm not sure law is the right word). So I actually think this show could be good for Mormons. From personal experience, the first thing that comes to most people's minds when you say "Mormon" is "polygamy". I've lost track of the number of times I've had to explain that polygamy is not allowed in the Mormon church. So with the conflict between the family and the church this show might actually help seperate the two in the mind of the general public.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw:
quote:It's like why I hate Will and Grace. Specifically, I hate Grace. She's what many people think Jewish women are like - loud, neurotic, vulgar.
I used to watch Will and Grace -- I'm sure I saw at least one whole season -- and I had no idea she was supposed to be Jewish.
The only time they mentioned it was to have her make fun of some negative stereotype she was exhibiting.
There's no indication that her being Jewish caused her to actually do anything or affected her life in any way.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
blackwolve, What I know of Mormon culture is from Hatrack. I think the Harry Dean Stanton character is considered(by himself) as a "pure Mormon." That is the impression I got from the last show.
I am still really confused about who is or was LDS in the show. I think I am supposed to be, though.
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
Liz, none of the main characters with the exception of the eldest boys friend, and the eldest girls friend, are members of the LDS church. Everyone else is in a kind of reformed LDS church, that broke off of the mainstream one in 1890's. From what I can tell, Barb used to be LDS, but could be wrong. So the two religions are very similar in how they go about daily life and how they pray, and especially how they conduct church with sacrament meeting and preisthood and such. But they are not part of the mainstream church.
But even then, go to some of the fan sits for Big Love and you'll see just how much people associate mormons to polygamy and how confused they are.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
T, can you give me an analogy with other religions? (I am so confused) Is the LDS/broken-off church like Catholics/Protestants, like Sunni/Shiite, like Orthodox/Reformed in Judaism?
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
There have been different groups who have broken off of the LDS church. Reformed LDS, Fundamentalist LDS and such. In this case, the prophet at the time revealed "hey, no polygamy" and those who didn't agree with it considered him not to be the true prophet, and broke off. So they still believe in the Book of Mormon, and the revealations of Joseph Smith, they just don't believe that the leader of the LDS church (from the 1890's and so on) is a true prophet.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
quote:Originally posted by T_Smith:
But even then, go to some of the fan sits for Big Love and you'll see just how much people associate mormons to polygamy and how confused they are.
In my experience most people in the US make that association. You assume that Big Love caused that association, I'm saying the association was already there and Big Love is taking steps towards correcting it. Now people are posting on these forums, and their incorrect assumptions are being corrected. I think that's a good thing.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Well, I think T was making the same point, actually, just saying how many people have that assumption.
OK, can someone point me to a good, concise, site which explains the LDS religion? (or link to a good thread here)
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Thanks, T.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
OK, the first thing I learned is that Mormons have really white teeth!
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I dled that show today. It was interesting, but they don't seem to know much about Mormons. But then again, neither do I outside of reading OSC and Saints and the Mormon.org website.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Well, I think they know a lot about Mormons, but the family, as I see it, is trying to break out of FLDS? Fundamentalist LDS?
Instead of portraying Mormons as polygamists, I think the show is portraying them, instead, as almost persecuting them. The Mormons in the show seem to be people to hide from, for this polygamist family.
I watched an Anderson Goober special on Warren Jeffs. Could this show be based on his story? He seems an awful lot like the Harry Dean Stanton character.
I like how this family lives. I like how they work together. I like this show. I could never live that way, but I can see how it would work for some people.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
lso, the boys who left the Jeffs compound are referred to as "The Lost Boys." Is this a Card reference? I have not read that novel, and I wondered.
Posted by dawnmaria (Member # 4142) on :
I really like the show, but I could do with less of Bill Paxton's butt. It's cute and all but just a little less please. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
For reasons like that, I don't want to watch it, but I'm fascinated by the recaps on TWOP.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: OK, the first thing I learned is that Mormons have really white teeth!
*sigh*
I'm such a bad Mormon.
ETA: Elizabeth, I really doubt it's a reference to OSC's The Lost Boys. His lost boys are in North Carolina and they're not Mormon. (Well, the main character's family is, but the lost boys are not.) I don't see how it could be related at all.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I agree it's probably a direct Peter Pan reference.
Posted by His Savageness (Member # 7428) on :
So I'm the only Mormon here at work, and I had a co-worker tape me some episodes because I was kind of curious and had gotten some questions about it. My thoughts on the show can be summed up in one word: meh.
It wasn't a bad show, and I could see how someone unfamiliar with Utah and Mormon culture could enjoy it, but to me it was just, off. Not offensive, (at least the episodes I saw) just not quite right. It's like they hired somebody who said "oh, I know all about Mormons and polygamy, I'll make sure you include all the appropriate references so everyone watching will think that this how Mormons and Polygamists actually act and talk." The dialogue and references felt forced and out of context (when addressing specific Mormon/fundamental themes).
Posted by Sabrina (Member # 9413) on :
quote:Originally posted by dawnmaria: I really like the show, but I could do with less of Bill Paxton's butt. It's cute and all but just a little less please.
I know, what is up with that? Did he just join a gym or something?
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I kind of like the show, but I cannot understand why he has to have those extra ditzy wives, like the one with the credit card addition and the one that is just young and ditzy. He always had a cool first wife and should have just stuck with her because she's very smart and pretty and he obviously adores her, but perhaps it's a fundamentalist sort of thing....
Those folks are a bit scary though. I wonder if the people on this show are supposed to be related to those scary fundelmentalists that send boys off away from them when they hit adolescence so old me and can all the girls. Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Nicki is not at all ditzy. She is much more conniving. She just had an addiction. (has)
I do not find Bill Paxton attractive in the least. He bugs me a lot, actually.
I love Bruce Dern's character.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Nicki is not at all ditzy. She is much more conniving. She just had an addiction. (has)
I do not find Bill Paxton attractive in the least. He bugs me a lot, actually.
I love Bruce Dern's character.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Nicki keeps lying all the time, plus it means Bill has to be bothered by that evil weasel faced father of hers. I hate that guy. Though he has a cool guitar, he's such a JERK! Their extended family members serious scare me.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
It is the Mormon Mafia. They are scarier than the Sopranos, they just sort of appear places. Nicki's character is the most interesting for me. I do not like her one bit, but I think she is going to add some spice to things as time goes by.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I can't decide if Nikki is plain evil or just so insecure she attempts to manupulate people into liking her.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
She knows how to fix stuff, that's cool. And she's rather strong, but she still is just so frustrating. 60,000 DOLLARS? I wouldn't have a debt that high for credit cards. Is she NUTS?
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Yeah, she's nuts when it comes to credit cards and that's Great Badness(tm) but I can't decide if her personality in general is Evil or Insecure.
Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
It was my understanding that Bill's first wife, Barb, became extremely ill (cancer?). Bill apparently was not the well off store owner that he is now, and had to borrow a large amount of money from Roman Grant in order to pay for Barb's medical bills. I believe it was an additional requirement of their deal that Bill would marry Nikki, Roman's daughter, who also assisted in taking care of Barb during her illness. Bill was obviously desperate, as he also let Roman work his way into getting a percentage of the profit from Bill's first store. At least this is what I've been able to glean from my viewing of the show, without doing any additional research into the matter.
As for Margene, who knows? Maybe the 2nd wife was a catalyst for Bill to embrace the lifestyle. I imagine we'll hear more about their courtship in future episodes.
Posted by johnsonweed (Member # 8114) on :
I think you are right on the money Fits, but who really knows. I have never watched a show where I know so little about the main characters. They spend all their time telling us what of going wrong and not letting us get to really know who they are and what motivates them. In their effort ot Out Desperate ABC's Sunday night show they are forgetting some basic tennets of story telling.
I'm getting bored with it.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I thught the scene where Ben lost his virginity was one of the saddest things I have ever seen.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
I am enjoying it more and more.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Did anyone see the season finale?
/
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: I thught the scene where Ben lost his virginity was one of the saddest things I have ever seen.
It was. He didn't seem to enjoy it... Poor thing.
I haven't dled it yet. The season finale
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
well, dagnabit, get to it! So few people watch it, and I have no one to talk to about it!
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Ok. I'll dl it if my darn comp can stop blue screening for a few minutes...
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
I watch it.
I cried when Margene got Baptized in the back yard. I don't even know why. I'm such a mess.
But, uh.... Yeah, I thought it was awfully weird how suddenly Wanda is running around ***SPOILER*** poisoning people.
They just sort of threw that storyline in there from out of nowhere.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Yeah, that part was rather sweet. I don't know why that other chick wants her kids raised by those creepy people... Gods, they annoy me. especially that weasle looking man. Cannot stand him But he has a guitar and that is cool.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
He has THE guitar!
Spoilers : ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; TL, I was also surprised by that! I gues she poisoned the dad, too, then. I actually loved the scene.
The young sister-wife is So messedd-up.
And I cried when Barb was exposed. That was just so very sad.
What I like about the program is that it shows two different views of polygamy. One is the stereotypical, freaky, young exploited girl view, the more cultish side. The other is just a family who chooses this philosophy and makes it work no better or worse than any family makes their life work.
I really love this show.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Exposed?
As in
Credit card debt? That was just stupid of her. 60,000 dollars. Geez.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
Exposed as in watch the episode already, exposed.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I put the spoiler semi-colons in for you, Syn, sheesh.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Ooops You meant Barb. I like her. She's my favourite wife. I don't know why he just doesn't keep her and lose the other wives.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
well, I think she feels that way as well. But then it wouldn't be the show it is! In fact, i think HE feels the same way.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
Who does? Now you're not making sense.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Bill. He loves Barb best too. I adore Barb. She's very smart and logical and leads well and is just quite classy.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
Oh. I don't know. I don't actually think Bill likes any of them 'best' but I could be wrong about that. Barb is kind of selfish, at times. Well, I mean, just look at what happened... She never should have... Well, you know what I'm talking about.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
>.< not until this finishes dling and between the blue screens and the pop ups I'll never know!
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
tl, I find Bill to be the selfish one. Barb is pedantic. Nicki is conniving. Margene is naive, but much smarter than any of them think.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
I think Bill's awesome. That speech he gave to Margene that one time, 'you are part of this family, and we are part of a line of ancestors stretching into the past, and into the future' or whatever it was he said.
He won me over with that speech.
With that speech he had me thinking, hey, Polygamy really *is* the way! Who knew?
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
Margene's probably my favorite.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Margene's adorable. I really like Barb too.
I think Nikki has potential. Yesh she's Evil/Scared/Insecure but if they let us see a little more of her pain maybe we can grow to love her.
Honestly, I think Bill is a minor character in the story next to the women. I love seeing them interact.
Oh, and I got all misty at Margene's baptism too =)
Pix
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I wonder if having polygamous ancestors changes the squick factor at all for watching this show.
I went to the conference for the Mormon History Association a few weeks ago, and I've been on a polygamy mini-kick ever since. For every historical picture of a lonely third wife neglected by her husband and condescended to by his "real" family, there is a picture of fiesty women such as Eliza R. Snow Smith Young or Emmeline B. Wells brawling in the streets of Salt Lake City with Susan B. Anthony, insisting that polygamy served the rights of women by freeing them from the ties to home and allowing them to go into the world and make a mark without leaving their children by the side of the road. In the days before birth control and when the only real security for a woman was to marry someone who would take care of them, it was a viable choice for a non-wealthy woman who wished for some practical freedom.
I think it might be like being unmarried. Some people find it liberating, and other people find it incredibly lonely.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
I hereby promise to make all of my future wives feel loved and appreciated.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Kat, For me, this show has opened a whole new line of thought on the topic. I guess I never thought of it as squicky, just not for me. In a world where people had to band together to survive, it made sense. In a world where people had to get as many children to help them out, it made sense. But in this world, now, i don't really see it as NOT making sense. I think the show does a really good job of showing the freakish compound life vs. the "normal" polygamist family life that Bill and his wives lead. My heart broke for barb when she was exxposed.
I don;t know, I just think this is an excellent show, and I am seeing things in a new light.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Exposed? I'm going to watch it soon because I am so CURIOUS.
I don't think I'd like to be polygamist. I want a person all to myself. Mine, mine mine. I'd have to chase those other hussies off with a stick.
*laughs* hussies
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Syn: What if they other Hussy(ies) were your wife too? Not Sister Wives like in the show but actual wives.
I don't think I'm cut out for that, but I can see the benefits. Especially for women like me and thee.
Pix
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
But it would be so annoying to have to share with them... TO be laying in bed missing that fellow because he's with someone else because polygamy is sadly not about rolling on pillows and oil like some would think it is. It's about arguing and being jealous. But, at least one would get help with stuff... I could force one of the other wives to clean so I don't have to....
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Maybe He's off with wife #2, but you're there with wife #3.
Seems rather blissful.
Except the whole jealousy and "OMG I love 2 of my spice but the other is just a total beeyotch" and "Who ate the hamburger I was going to make for tonights dinner" and the feeling of being left out because A loves B more than you and C only got in this thing because she loves D...
Ok... not so blissful...
Still, I see the upside.
Pix
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Wife # 3 eh?
But it's never like that... Wife #3 would be like ARE YOU OUT YOUR MIND!!!!! Somethings are more fun to fantasize about I reckon than to live.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
That meddling woman Why'd she have to do that in front of everyone? Barb was so crushed Poor her Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
So, it was the young wife of Romsn who "told?"
She is so creepy.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I thought it was that anti-polygamy chick... The one who earlier was scoffing at polygamists. Yes, that's the one it was.
I don't like her. Poor Barb. She made her so sad.
Also Bill's family is nuts. If you shook a walnut tree they'd all fall out... Antifreeze
But... He was threatening the kid though.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
No, Syn, I think the other woman was THINKING about exposing Bill through Barb. She was there, but I do not think she did it. Roman made the call. I think the other woman(the secretary) decided not to, and felt really bad when she saw what happened.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I don't know. She sure did seem to be the one who did it. The younger wife just seemed to want to escape somehow and had no idea how to do that... I don't think Roman made the call because he was too busy worrying about his son.
Posted by Fitz (Member # 4803) on :
It was most definitely Roman who made the call. It shows him on the phone saying "Yes, I would like to talk to someone about this evening's ceremony." Not only that, but the woman who works for Bill looked surprised and somewhat sad about what happened.
Oh, and though the young wife didn't make the call, she was obviously the one who told Roman about the mother of the year ceremony. As he makes the call, she is shown looking on with a smug look of revenge-fed satisfaction.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Yes, that's how I remember it. i think the secretary's,plan was to "out" them afterwards, or maybe she changed her mind.
But I do think it was the little psycho who told Roman, because she was angry with Barb for letting her go back to the compound.
In a way, BArb is the most naive.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
That does make sense. I didn't even think of that... Hmmm... I reckon that poor Bill is screwed.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Many times!
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Sorry, moderators.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
On all sides. Poor fellow. With those insane people in his family, Roman's son anti-freezed, who knows what will happen to him? And what about his business. His life really sucks... And I felt so bad for Barb because shse really is rather naive and I felt bad for Nikki when she freaked out. She looked rather fetching in that dress.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
OK, but here's the thing. If I knew the owner of Home Depot in Springfield was a polygamist, I would not care. So, I don;t really buy that as a terrible thing. Is it because it is a Mormon town, and the Mormons will reject a polygamist-owned business?
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Probably. They will be like, you people give us a bad name and are relics so we will not support you or something. I don't care as long as folks don't marry 14 or 15 year olds or teenages in general.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
quote:Somethings are more fun to fantasize about I reckon than to live.
It's sad how often this is true.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
I LOVED the season premiere!!! I think it's interesting how much this show has evolved. I watched the DVD for the first season and overall the show was incredible. At first, I was a little bored. It did seem like they were going more for shock than substance. I think it just took the writers a little while to figure out the show's center and what their characters were really about. But once they found it- man, this show became one of the best I have ever seen. Interestingly, it seems like once the show found itself the number and level of sex scenes decreased a lot.
I've enjoyed reading Margene's blog as well. Does anybody know if one of the show's writers writes it?
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
I don't watch the show and never will. However, I think they should do an episode with a person in a group like "Tapestry," an anti-poly group. Those people are like ultra-feminists with a specific grudge.
This does bring up a question that bothers me about having this show exist at all. What is the purpose of this existing? As a mainstream Mormon I find its very existance as offensive. Then again, there is a reason (like that equally horrible show Sapranos) why it was on pay cable. Disgusting.
Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
OC, is it the depiction of polygamy that you find so disgusting or something else? You say that you've never watched the show, so I'm not sure what to make of your vehement offense.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Wait, last night's show was the season premiere? I thought it was just one I had missed.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
I think I pretty much expressed the reason for my dislike is that it existed as a show at all. It has nothing to do with what it might be like if I actually watch it. For instance, I can imagine there are a lot of people who would never watch, but be as equally disgusted, by a television show about the KKK as protagonists. My exact reasons are complicated and I don't have time to elaberate.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I saw a good chunk of it (flicking back and forth) It wasn't so bad, but I still can't understand why he just doesn't stick with his first wife. I like her best.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
occasional: They go out of their way to point out these aren't mainstream mormons. You needn't worry about being confused for them by anyone who actually watches the show.
Elizabeth: Yes, Monday's episode was the season premire. It was pretty good. I loved Margine's guilt trip. I also liked how it showed the women loved eachother too (though niki is still a cold beeyotch)
I don't like the Juniper Creek subplots as much. Severe Legal Trouble is a brewin' on that front. That's not as interesting to me as the family dynamics.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Oh, but the Pixiest, that mother! She is priceless!
I love Margene. It is the officious first wife I can't stand.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:occasional: They go out of their way to point out these aren't mainstream mormons. You needn't worry about being confused for them by anyone who actually watches the show.
I don't think that being confused with polygamists is most Mormons' main concern with Big Love.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
kq: well, he left his objections up to our imagination. I don't know what could have invoked his ire so much as to compare them to the KKK.
Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
Pix, That underlying anger and disgust was what I was poking at. Very few things in this world evoke such ire in me, so I was curious as to what the root cause was. Now, with the KKK comparison, I'm even more intrigued.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Am I alone in being strangely interested in a show that would show the KKK in a positive light? I doubt it could be done, but they love their pets and children. That's a positive thing. Plus some of them have a strange interest in Odin.... Which is sort of cool...
*is weird*
iI could see why a person would object to the show, but I find it fascinating and I feel the same way about the Sopranos. But I have a strange interest in the mob I don' understand. I hate them, but they FASCINATE me.
Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
quote:I doubt it could be done, but they love their pets and children.
This is an interesting statement. I have no doubts at all that people can be shown in a sympathetic light while still belonging to an abhorrent group. Case in point, my step-grandfather was (from what I've heard) a good man who took care of his family, ran a successful business, was kind to strangers, and had a white robe in his closet. There's a strange dichotomy between what people will do as an individual and what people will do as a group.
Posted by otterk10 (Member # 10463) on :
I watched the first episode from the first season yesterday. I'm a little confused. It seems that only the fundamentalists still practice polygamy. However, Bill is ultra secular, and secular America condemns polygamy. Why does he practice it?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Bill is not ultra-secular. He is in hiding. It's very clear - mostly in later episodes - that he is very devout in his beliefs.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
To be honest, I don't see what is inherently abhorrent about polygamy. I can see how it can be abused and the system only really works well in a situation where there are more men than women (and efforts to keep that ratio uneven would be abhorrent), but the idea itself doesn't seem that bad to me. Of course, considering all the comments Mormons get about polygamy, I think the funniest thing is that my daughter's closest polygamist roots come not from her 6th generation LDS side, but instead through her Chinese side.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
Just to be clear, I am comparing the discomfort rather than relatedness between Polygamy and KKK representation. Here are some of my reasons the best I can.
1)To have polygamists who are also of the "Mormon tradition" will by its nature cause confusion as to the mainstream. This is especially the case with casual viewers. No matter how much they split the two the only ones who are going to notice are those who are already aware.
2)I am very concerned about the actual religious content of the show. Not just what it shows that could be positive, but the potential negative of what it could show or its portrayal. Television has not been very kind to the more conservative religious traditions. In fact, they haven't been kind to religion at all.
3) This is partly from what I have heard, but the producers have an agenda that is for me questionable. Politically speaking, they are showing something that is illegal and to many people immoral as perfectly normal. You can be the judge of what that message means.
There is probably more, but this is at least the surface reasons for my discomfort.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Politically speaking, they are showing something that is illegal and to many people immoral as perfectly normal.
No, they're not. It's definitely not shown as "perfectly normal."
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
There was a group of ultra secular Mormons (Godbieites) who left the Church in in Utah during the 1870's their "hook' was to join the mainstream US culture. They rejected most mormon beliefs,but retained the practice of polygamy. Many of them became "spiritualists". They had some connections with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and his group. (edit) I was reponding to otterk10. I just got sidetracked and took too long. Sorry.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I saw a special on TLC about polygamists who were NOT Mormon or a Mormon splinter group.
It seemed to me that if I and my church were directed by God to pracice it again I wouldn't find it too abbhorent. The problems in this family didn't come from the fact that they were a polygamous family; they came from the fact that the guy was a selfish, self-centered, philandering jerk who didn't consider his wives' feelings before sleeping with a new woman.
Similarly, I think the problems in those splinter groups who practice polygamy don't come from polygamy itself but from the denigration of women, the forced marriage and rape of children, the thinning of the male population, etc.-- all of which are not necessarily part of polygamy but part of that specific cultural/religious practice as it is currently practiced.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
Looking around at my dirty house, the piles of laundry, the empty cupboards (I was supposed to go grocery shopping on Monday, but was too tired from work and then Tuesday had some unexpected errands), part of me thinks, if she cooked and cleaned and shopped, I wouldn't mind sharing my husband. In some of the Chinese literature I read, the women get to decide on the next wife and pick people they can be friends with. So, it isn't necessarily that bad- unless you're the lowest wife and the first wife is horrid. Then your life can be pretty miserable.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I'd hate to be part of a polygamist relationship. Only one small factor would make me consider it. But being a 4th wife? Sharing a husband? No way!
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:For instance, I can imagine there are a lot of people who would never watch, but be as equally disgusted, by a television show about the KKK as protagonists.
I'd be terribly curious about a show about a functional KKK family, or at least a thoughtful miniseries.
I've seen a few episodes of Big Love, and the hook seems to be Jeanne Triplehorn. She seems fantastic. Paxton's character is nice enough. A little blah, another bourgeoisie white rube philistine. But hey, the nation is lousy with them and we've even elected one president, twice. Triplehorn seems to carry the show. If some active grand wizard of the KKK received similar treatment, the show would be illuminating.
[ June 13, 2007, 05:01 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholar: Looking around at my dirty house, the piles of laundry, the empty cupboards , part of me thinks, if she cooked and cleaned and shopped, I wouldn't mind sharing my husband. .
Um, that, and she'd have to take on some of the sex duty too. I'd be all for it.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote:I've seen a few episodes of Big Love, and the hook seems to be Jeanne Triplehorn. She seems fantastic.
Yes, she is fantastic in this. But I wouldn't so much say she carries the show as much as her character carries the family. Every family member, except possibly Bill, has vast depth and adds a lot to the show. The only reason I exclude Bill is that he's so ultimately concerned about/ defined by caring for his family that he doesn't really have any time for himself. I think he's a great character, but he's certainly not the character that makes you think.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"The only reason I exclude Bill is that he's so ultimately concerned about/ defined by caring for his family that he doesn't really have any time for himself"
That is interesting, because I see him as completely and utterly selfish.
He reminds me of a character in a novel, a Dickens novel, maybe, and I can't quite place it. One of those people who is "good" and just so boring and harmful to those closest to him.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:So, it isn't necessarily that bad- unless you're the lowest wife and the first wife is horrid. Then your life can be pretty miserable.
Yeah, but in my "ideal" practice of polygamy, there would be no first and second hierarchy, just lovingly welcoming in future sister wives.
I know, wouldn't always happen that way. But ideally.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
ketchupqueen? Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'm so kidding, sweetheart. It was just too good to resist posting.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
For myself, absolutely not. Never. I don't care. I'm not sharing. I can hire a housekeeper to do the dishes. The promise of heaven isn't worth being trapped in hell on earth.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I think it is significant that only some were ever called to practice polygamy, not all, and you were not supposed to have more wives than you could a) support and b) treat equally.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
If my husband could support another household, he can hire a maid and a part-time nanny.
I suggest More Wives Than One, a treatment of plural marriage that I read and really enjoyed. Basically, sometimes it worked out. Sometimes it didn't. Divorce was an option for when it didn't. Being first wife most certainly did not give veto power - husbands married second and third wives without the permission of the first all the time. It was very illuminating and it made me love and respect the men and women who were so faithful, but wow - yeah, never.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
The relationship between Wanda and Joe is sweet, too. Wanda is nuts in the coolest way.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I think I've read that one, actually. It was good.
My husband and I have actually discussed this what-if. Right now, of course, it would be moot even if the prophet said, "Polygamy is back on! Go out and marry a second wife!" because we don't have any money. But say it happened in ten years. It comes down to I trust my husband and the Lord that much. I would be willing to give it a try. And on his part, he wouldn't think of it if I didn't do the wife-choosing.
Okay, we're weird, we have these discussions when we come home from church that go off on all kinds of tangents. Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
From my understanding, the practice of polygamy was a calling. You did it because you were chosen by the leadership to take another wife. I can't recall if that was always the case, but most of the time it seems to have been that way.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Occasional, If it makes you feel better, I have learned more about how polygamy is NOT a part of the Mormon church than otherwise. It is tastefully done, and I think it brings up huge issues that arise in any marriage. In fact, the whole idea of polygamy, while not appealing to me on many levels, is something I can understand, now. These people are not freaks, though they are connected to freaks.(the compound gang) They are a family. They love each other, get angry with each other, and forgive each other like any other family. The parents screw up the children no more or less than the rest of us do, while trying valiantly to do the right thing by them. I love this show.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
KQ, what was your favorite part of the book?
I think what was so revelatory was that it examined how polygamy was actually practiced, both the better-than-we-remember parts and the not-as-good-as-we-remember parts.
Basically, the idea of taking another wife always being a calling that only happened if the existing wife agreed is a sugar-coating of the reality. A big, thick sugar coat.
I would never want it and not do it because either I would no longer be my husband's main concern, or else we would together be creating an underclass and pretending she was equal. Both are too distasteful.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by scholar: To be honest, I don't see what is inherently abhorrent about polygamy. I can see how it can be abused and the system only really works well in a situation where there are more men than women (and efforts to keep that ratio uneven would be abhorrent), but the idea itself doesn't seem that bad to me. Of course, considering all the comments Mormons get about polygamy, I think the funniest thing is that my daughter's closest polygamist roots come not from her 6th generation LDS side, but instead through her Chinese side.
I say this with a deep love and appreciation for Chinese culture and thought.
I would not look to them generally speaking as a model of how a husband and wife ought to interact.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: I think I've read that one, actually. It was good.
My husband and I have actually discussed this what-if. Right now, of course, it would be moot even if the prophet said, "Polygamy is back on! Go out and marry a second wife!" because we don't have any money. But say it happened in ten years. It comes down to I trust my husband and the Lord that much. I would be willing to give it a try. And on his part, he wouldn't think of it if I didn't do the wife-choosing.
Okay, we're weird, we have these discussions when we come home from church that go off on all kinds of tangents.
Hey I talked this over with the Mrs. as well. She is very much opposed to it, but then again as I understood it, the man cannot marry a second wife without the first agreeing to it.
I would not personally ever seek after a 2nd wife in this life, it would be really rough on me if I was asked my by a leader of the church to take a woman as a 2nd wife.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
She had to agree to it, but in practice, if she didn't agree to it, then she would be "unreasonable" or unfaithful and they would go ahead anyway.
So, basically, she had the choice to agree or to have it happen without her agreement.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:The only reason I exclude Bill is that he's so ultimately concerned about/ defined by caring for his family that he doesn't really have any time for himself
This is what bothers me the most about the pro-family ethos in general, thought not so much that Bill doesn't have time for himself, but he doesn't take time to care about anything else. When everyone is so loaded down with kids and family responsibilities and getting into heaven by having more kids and attending your family responsibilities, the entire picture isn't so much selfish, but sophisticatedly clannish, bereft of true civic responsibility, which admittedly, I equate largely with caring for strangers. First off, I think Barb is perfect: they wrote her as smart, kind, passionate, beautiful, funny, curious, and civic-minded. She is the center of the show, and not because she is the center of the family, but because she is the best person. She could be the third wife, and she'd still be the best person on the show.
Bill is going to spend the rest of his life having kids and committing minor sins of commission and omission to keep those kids fed and happy. The guy is worried about earning daily bread for his family and gaining entrance into the celestial kingdom, and since his family is so big, he doesn't spend any effort worrying about anything else. Even if he only had one wife, I'm just not sure that that's the right model for the American man. _________
I've been thinking about families in general, and the whole idea of teaching kids the difference between right and wrong, but always from distance. There is wickedness there. I can't articulate it, but there is a profound problem with keeping your eyes on your family and on heaven to the exclusion of most everything else.
With respect to the show, I wonder how behavior would change if, instead of families going to heaven together, whole states went to heaven together.
[ June 14, 2007, 12:22 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think your model of someone caring more about strangers than his family is deeply flawed as well.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: She had to agree to it, but in practice, if she didn't agree to it, then she would be "unreasonable" or unfaithful and they would go ahead anyway.
So, basically, she had the choice to agree or to have it happen without her agreement.
Are you sure this is true universally or even generaly speaking? I mean I can easily see this happening but I have trouble believing that if say the prophet's wife said, "I just can't, no, I won't let you marry her," that the response would be, "Well if you are going to be unreasonable I'll marry her anyway, if you change your mind here's an invitation to the reception."
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
BlackB, I have to side with Katharina on this one. I think the relationship between Emma and Joseph Smith was very much that kind of a situation. You can tell that Joseph Smith by his letters and attention loved Emma more than any other woman he married, but he took wives dispite her objections.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:I think your model of someone caring more about strangers than his family is deeply flawed as well.
I guess it's a matter of picking your poisons and striking a balance. While they are both pious and family oriented, there is some decent quality Barb has that Bill lacks. _____ Depending with whom you talk, the basic unit of society is the individual, or the family, or the community, or the state. I think the problem with all of those options is that there may not be a basic unit of society.
[ June 14, 2007, 05:47 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: BlackB, I have to side with Katharina on this one. I think the relationship between Emma and Joseph Smith was very much that kind of a situation. You can tell that Joseph Smith by his letters and attention loved Emma more than any other woman he married, but he took wives dispite her objections.
That is not my understanding of the situation. I was under the impression she gave consent but resented doing so in her heart. You may disagree with it but I see it more as God commanding Joseph to take wives, Emma being spiritual and after discussing it with Joseph acknowledged at as God, but still was very unhappy with the arrangement. She also resented that he had to spend so much time being the prophet instead of "Her husband." She let that disent and even hate sink in and overtime she persuaded herself that polygamy was not even Smith's idea but Brigham Young's.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
I marvel that there is this huge religion right here in the US and I know so little about it. I have no more knowledge of what BB and kat are arguing about than I have of what two aliens on some other planet could be talking about. That's actually kind of funny.
If I catch rivka and tante discussing some arcane point of OT dietary law, I have a chance of getting what points they are making, and having some thoughts. I've glanced over Leviticus a time or two.
Discussions about Joseph Smith and whether or not polygamy was his idea, and what his wife thought about it....I hope nobody expects me to have opinions on it.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
quote:"The only reason I exclude Bill is that he's so ultimately concerned about/ defined by caring for his family that he doesn't really have any time for himself"
That is interesting, because I see him as completely and utterly selfish.
He reminds me of a character in a novel, a Dickens novel, maybe, and I can't quite place it. One of those people who is "good" and just so boring and harmful to those closest to him.
In a somewhat similar, although not remotely identical, vein of what Irami said, I don't think that making your family the center of your life necessarily makes you selfless. I would agree that Bill is very selfish. He cares about his family and wants what is best for them, but for the most part he wants it on his terms. He has an image of how things should be and that's what he's working towards. Barb, on the other, is filled with compassion and love for each member of the family. She's willing to adjust her vision of how things should be in order to bring happiness to others. Barb's sacrifices are centered on others' happiness. Bill's are ultimately centered on his own.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: BlackB, I have to side with Katharina on this one. I think the relationship between Emma and Joseph Smith was very much that kind of a situation. You can tell that Joseph Smith by his letters and attention loved Emma more than any other woman he married, but he took wives dispite her objections.
That would make me so mad!
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"I would agree that Bill is very selfish. He cares about his family and wants what is best for them, but for the most part he wants it on his terms. He has an image of how things should be and that's what he's working towards. Barb, on the other, is filled with compassion and love for each member of the family. She's willing to adjust her vision of how things should be in order to bring happiness to others. Barb's sacrifices are centered on others' happiness. Bill's are ultimately centered on his own."
Yes, Amancer, that is what I meant, but you said it much more clearly.
He "looks good," and she is good(even though she bugs me) It is almost like he is saying, "Make it so" to her. When she is publicly humiliated, and then questions her whole life, I felt his reaction was ridiculous. I really wanted her to leave.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia:
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: BlackB, I have to side with Katharina on this one. I think the relationship between Emma and Joseph Smith was very much that kind of a situation. You can tell that Joseph Smith by his letters and attention loved Emma more than any other woman he married, but he took wives dispite her objections.
That would make me so mad!
Mad at your husband or mad at God?
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Probably both...
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I agree.
And that's why the most important part of my thinking I could do it is that I trust my husband. I trust that he WOULDN'T decide I was being "unreasonable", as some husbands definitely did. It was a calling extended more to a class of men than a specific person, in many cases. If my husband was in the group asked to do it, I trust that he WOULD say "no" if I said "no"-- and that's why I would be willing to do it.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Wouldn't that make him wrong for obeying his wife instead of obeying God?
("Probably both" is a pretty reasonable answer given the situation.)
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
I really don't understand any sort of reasoning that would go along with God wanting polygamy to happen. What have the reasons been, when such has been the case?
-pH
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
Do most LDS practitioners harbor semi-secret "what if" scenarios about polygamy? I mean, I could totally see a 15-year-old being really into the idea, but I just don't see why adults would think it a good idea. If I brought the idea up to my wife, she'd probably castrate me on the spot.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
quote:Originally posted by pH: I really don't understand any sort of reasoning that would go along with God wanting polygamy to happen. What have the reasons been, when such has been the case?
-pH
Speaking from a historical/scientific standpoint, not a religious one, I believe it would have to be a matter of needing bodies. Women can only have a child a year, whereas men can father many children a day.
God needs followers. God says, "Procreate!"
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
quote:I just don't see why adults would think it a good idea.
I wasn't going to participate in this thread, since I don't watch TV, and have no desire to watch the referenced program. And, I have related this personal reference before. But, it does give one answer for some Mormons who were not in positions of leadership or influence. Great-Grandpa Miller married his childhood sweetheart in Denmark prior to emigrating to Utah. Her sister emigrated at the same time. The two sisters talked Grandpa into marrying the sister. The two of them had a close friend from the same island, who had not married and had few prospects. They talked Grandpa into marrying her too. The four of them evidently got along very well for life. Much later,there was a young girl from the same island, speaking the same dialect, who had been raped on the boat over and arrived in Utah pregnant and without means or friends. Grandpa was asked by the local Church authorities to marry her and give her and the child a home. She was much younger than the other wives and they never liked her very much. She died young and is not buried in the family plot. However, as a boy my father remembers her grave being decorated on Memorial day like the others.
[ June 14, 2007, 07:15 PM: Message edited by: Artemisia Tridentata ]
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I like the scenes between Joe and Barb. In Joe, you can see his long suffering and addiction, and Barb has been through cancer and polygamy. They both embrace their pasts with their eyes wide open, and look forward timidly into the future. It's a sweetness between them.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Wouldn't that make him wrong for obeying his wife instead of obeying God?
("Probably both" is a pretty reasonable answer given the situation.)
Yes, it would. Which is why I would say yes.
But I'd have to know that he would respect my wishes if I said no, even if it meant disobeying God, before I'd know that I could say yes.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
Elizabeth, I personally think that answer *is* the answer. Some have tried to prove by statistics that isn't the case, but the Scriptures seem to always connect it to having more children. Even the Scripture about instituting polygamy says it is for "increase of glory" for at least the next life.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
I was hesitant to watch this show at first because I was worried about the effect it would have on the mainstream Mormon population (yes, I know they go out of their way to point out that these people are not mainstream, but...). It's the same reason I hate Will and Grace - I would hate for people to think that Grace is a typical Jewish woman. I find her abhorrant and not like me in any way. Anyway, Andrew decided to watch, so I ended up watching, too.
Barb is actually my least favorite character. I find it very hard to sympathize with her. I feel that she brought her children into a difficult lifestyle (that involves lying, hiding, and fear of persecution) for something that she doesn't wholly believe in. Also, she should have done everything she could to get Rhonda away from Roman and Juniper Creek. She knew it wasn't right, but she let them take her back.
Nikki is actually my favorite character and I have the most sympathy for her. It was pretty strongly implied that she was molested by Roman and she grew up in a highly disfunctional, highly isolated household. Also I like that she's good with tools.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
I'm not unsympathetic to your assessment of Barb. We don't know what happened when she was sick. I think, but I could be mistaken, when Barb got sick, Roman reached out to pay for the medical bills and stake Bill's store, under the right light, it could very well appear as a revelation for Bill to believe in the principle. The man's wife was dying. Nikki sincerely prayed for Barb's health, and so Barb tried to give it a go to keep what's left of her family together. It's hard on the kids, but so is breaking up a family and Bill is a true believer, so what are you going to do? I imagine that in some families, the odd agnostic spouse goes to church all of the time, even when he/she don't believe, for the sake of the devout spouse and to put up a united front for the kids. Triplehorn is acting very well, I respect Barb as a character, I do think that Sarah has a complicated adolescence(the actress is doing a great job, as is her friend.)
[ June 14, 2007, 11:00 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Nikki annoys me. She keeps buying tons of stuff on her credit cards. How irresponsible.
*Tries not to buy limited edition cd with my credit card*
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Mrs. M,
I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, and let them come to their own conclusions. If they are stupid enough to think Debra Messing, a sitcom character, is a typical Jewish woman, then I don't have much hope for their general intellect.
The same with this show. The people who watch it who come to conclusions about Mormons based on these characters want to have those opinions, or already had them in the first place.
I have noticed that most unthoughtful(OK, dim) people stay away from the these types of HBO shows.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
One thing to remember is that Bill has been through the ringer, too. He was abandoned as a young teen by his father, rejected his beliefs as part of of rejecting his family and his rough childhood, and finally, when he thought his wife was dying, began to believe again what he had been taught as a child.
I'm sure that there were monetary motives mixed in there as well, but there was also a pretty intense mindgame played on him for most of his life.
Edit: also, his obsession with taking care of his family can be seen as the pendulum swinging far past the anti-care he received from his family. None of this excuses anything bad he might have done, but it makes it far more understandable.
I had a similar revelation after seeing Casino Royale ***SPOILERS AHEAD***. I had read the book, but I never connected the first woman Bond loved after his wife died betraying him with his misogyny. But it's very clear to me now - the last line of the book ("The bitch is dead") is setting a tone for the whole series. It doesn't excuse him or make it right. It just makes him less of a cartoonish cutout on the subject.
Posted by Hitoshi (Member # 8218) on :
I watched the pilot and it didn't really interest me much, but I think it's good that it brings up an issue people are uncomfortable talking about, and even more so, an issue that deals with the past traditions of a religion many people follow. Think of it this way: it's an opportunity to educate. Instead of panicking every time this subject is brought up in mainstream media for fear of it reopening old wounds, instead use it as an opportunity to educate people about why those stereotypes aren't true. You can't expect people to change their views unless you get a dialogue started, and you can't start a dialogue if you try to avoid or downplay the issue.
This is true for any minority, or even majority, that faces stereotypes. Instead of being offended and angrily trying to keep the subject from getting attention (which invariably gives the subject attention), try to use it as a tool for moderation and discussion. You can't knock down walls, after all, if you don't acknowledge that they exist.
I don't know, that's just my thoughts on the whole subject. At any rate, I'll give Big Love and Entourage another go and see if I like them any better.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by pH: I really don't understand any sort of reasoning that would go along with God wanting polygamy to happen. What have the reasons been, when such has been the case?
-pH
Fragments of reasoning from the mind of BB. All of this is purely speculation on my part. None of these thoughts are held onto very tightly by myself, and I would not even say are likely true.
1: There are going to be alot more women in heaven then men.
2: Men and women alike hate being alone and prefer the company of each other.
3: The only way for every man and woman to be matched up with at least one person of the opposite sex is polygamy.
That is the best reason I can come up with. It certainly does not ring true to me that God would command polygamy to further some sort of women in a harem situation.
Honestly speaking, the idea of a group of women all at my beck and call is NOT that appealing. TBH I'd probably go crazy trying to be fair to all of them as well as listening to their needs. It is to be hoped that in heaven we can learn to love perfectly and the solution to this problem will be apparent.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
quote:Do most LDS practitioners harbor semi-secret "what if" scenarios about polygamy?
I don't know about "most", but I do know many have had to come to terms with the idea of "what if I was asked to live this?".
Nearly everyone I know who has thought about it at all, has thought about it with fear and trembling. It's one thing to come to terms with the idea of doing what God asks; but that doesn't mean it's something people are secretly hoping for. <shudder>
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
Can anyone tell me, since it wasn't mentioned in the first forty or so posts in this thread, whether this show is a documentary/reality TV, or fiction?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
fiction - a weekly serial drama
Posted by IanO (Member # 186) on :
A number of years ago, I got the chance to work with a man who was a member of "The True and Living Church", a fundamentalist LDS group, and a practicer of polygamy. He and I got to know eachother over a number of years and a great deal of mutual respect built up. I did ask him if he practiced polygamy and why. He reasoned as follows:
1) To advance one must have a Christ-like personality. Our entire experience on earth is to experience, learn and grow. Life, death, birth, marriage, conflict and forgiveness. They are all part of the human experience.
2) Terrestrial Marriage brings difficulty. This is natural. No marriage is perfect, since it is the uniting of two imperfect people. But the struggle, mutual beliefs and common goals can enable one to not only have a successful marriage, but they are a better person for it. The marriage has, when it has been a success BECAUSE of the hard work of the members, has made both man and woman better people.
3) Celestial Marriage carries that to an even greater degree. Because now, in addition to the normal stresses of a single wife, there are the added family dynamics and conflicts. Hurting and cruelty can manifest itself, but so can kindness and forgiveness. Jealousy versus graciousness. Selflessness versus selfishness. More than that, it prepares the man for a more 'patriarchal' role. Now, he has (let's say) 3 wives to balance. He cannot give in merely out of sentiment to one, when there is conflict. He has to look out for the effects and ramifications it will have on the whole 'tribe'.
The image his description conjured up in my mind was that of a swimmer treading water, with ankle weights. It has the potential to produce growth and strength much more quickly. But it can also sink you. And he told me that anyone who wanted to practice polygamy simply for the 'extra' sex, was a 'damn fool'. A prostitute is much cheaper. He said it could break you or make you stronger.
As I said, I respected him and even met one of his wives and a couple of his younger kids (they came to work with him one day.) And I honestly believe he is a good man who tried his best and truly loved his family. I worked with him for around 5 years.
I DON'T agree with his reasoning at all. I believe that, AT BEST, polygamy was permitted, Biblically speaking, and even regulated to an extent. But it was never the intended state, nor was it promoted.
But I can, at least, understand the reasoning of him, at least. (Though not all , by any means, view or practice it this way- there are, sadly, too many men who would not 'grow' as intended, but abuse it. Power corrupts, and it is definitely a form of power).
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I'm watching this episode again without being distracted by that Chef show. Bill is not sensitive enough to his first wife's needs. Also, one thing that makes me NOT WANT TO GET MARRIED is the idea of having to go to dinner parties! The thought of having to sit with people I barely know engaging in small talk fills me with fear and absolute misery! What could be worse?! Poor Barb.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Syn: My hubby and I have never had a dinner party and probably never will. Such things are for extroverts.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Indeed. For people who like sitting around talking about nothing for several hours instead of things that are cool and important. Like music. I don't even want to think about cocktail parties...
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: Syn: My hubby and I have never had a dinner party and probably never will. Such things are for extroverts.
Your welcome to visit our home, Tiffany is becoming quite the culinary expert!
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
quote:Indeed. For people who like sitting around talking about nothing for several hours instead of things that are cool and important. Like music.
Syn, there's no rule of dinner parties which say you can't talk about music.
Here's the thing: you can talk about whatever you want to!
Posted by Valentine014 (Member # 5981) on :
quote: Nikki is actually my favorite character and I have the most sympathy for her. It was pretty strongly implied that she was molested by Roman and she grew up in a highly disfunctional, highly isolated household.
Mrs. M, I do not agree with half of your statement. I never saw any evidence that Nikki was abused (at least sexually) by Roman. I have never seen her act like a child abuse victim either. She acts like a very normal adult when around her family. She talks to them when she's having problems and ask for their advice. She smiles and laughs. I don't really see that behavior when she interacts with her married family. She is negative and seems unhappy. She's happy when she is causing conflict, but I think that is just her personality.
Posted by scholar (Member # 9232) on :
I thought there was a creepy vibe when Bill found Nicki and Roman in her bedroom. Physically, the mother encourages Bill and Barb to smack Nicki around whenever she misbehaves.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:Indeed. For people who like sitting around talking about nothing for several hours instead of things that are cool and important. Like music.
Come, now. We often have attended dinner parties where, after dinner, everyone goes and jams until late into the night. Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
quote:I thought there was a creepy vibe when Bill found Nicki and Roman in her bedroom. Physically, the mother encourages Bill and Barb to smack Nicki around whenever she misbehaves.
You thought that was creepy, and I thought that that was a sweet father daughter moment. I figure that Nikki's problem is that she is the most committed to the principle, yet she is the second wife. It's as if she considers her devoutness, as shallow is it may be, to be a sign of merit over Barb. I think, however, if she had a more mature devotion, she'd accept her place as second wife and quit challenging Barb, but that's me.
That's good plotting, actually, to have the second in command be more of a believer than the first. It's guaranteed tension, and always potential for a Cain and Abel scenario.
[ June 17, 2007, 02:16 AM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Valentine014 (Member # 5981) on :
I thought it was sweet too. My parents used to come into my bedroom and set on my bed and talk to me. They did that all the way up until I moved out.
I'm not completely dismissing the possibility, I just think it unlikely because there doesn't seem any evidence to support it.
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
Um, he was lying on the bed and she had her face in his crotch.
Now I've been estranged from my father for most of my life and I'm Jewish (we have rules about physical contact between the sexes), so I don't have much first-hand experience, but I can't imagine that that is normal behavior for a father and daughter at any age.
It was strange that they were in a bedroom alone, with the door shut, during a child's birthday party. Even if they just wanted to talk privately, there were other places they could have gone to be alone (remember, there are 3 houses there). From the way they all reacted, it certainly seemed to me that it was more than a conversation. Also, Nicki made sure not to touch Bill when she walked past him.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
BB: Thanks for the invitation =) But I meant, we're not the type who would enjoy dinner parties because we're introverted people.
We both put up good fronts at work (He being in sales and me in IT, we have to do a LOT of dealing with people) but when we make it home, it's hard to get us back out the door.
Plus I'm pretty durn shy...
...
As for Nikki, I never got a molestation vibe off her. I assumed her head on Roman's lap was meant to show a father-daughter closeness. Like Nikki reverted to being a little girl when he was around and wanted him to solve all her problems.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Roman creeps me out. He looks like a weasel and he also is MARRIED TO REALLY YOUNG TEENAGE GIRLS! I hate that guy.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:That is not my understanding of the situation. I was under the impression she gave consent but resented doing so in her heart.
Black Blade,
I'm sorry, but you're really wrong about this. Emma did not know about most of the wives of Joseph, and she was devestated when she found out after the fact. In fact, there was a horribly uncomfortable Relief Society meeting where Emma shared her anger at what she thought were baseless rumors about Joseph's plural wives with what she thought were her closest friends, and several in the room were Joseph's plural wives themselves.
Clearly, Joseph was between a rock and a hard place and had to choose between the Lord's commandments/lying to his wife and appeasing his wife/defying the Lord. He chose to do as the Lord was commanding, but he did it in spite of Emma and her verocious, heartbroken opposition to the very idea.
I have sympathy for Joseph and I do believe he was doing as the Lord commanded, but I'm with Emma and would feel as she did.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:BB: Thanks for the invitation =) But I meant, we're not the type who would enjoy dinner parties because we're introverted people.
We both put up good fronts at work (He being in sales and me in IT, we have to do a LOT of dealing with people) but when we make it home, it's hard to get us back out the door.
Plus I'm pretty durn shy...
Hey I can dig that, come over and we promise not a word will be said to you or your hubby. We can all just eat our food and stare at each other until somebody breaks the silence. Whichever couple makes a noise first has to invite the others over for the next party, ad infinitum Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina:
quote:That is not my understanding of the situation. I was under the impression she gave consent but resented doing so in her heart.
Black Blade,
I'm sorry, but you're really wrong about this. Emma did not know about most of the wives of Joseph, and she was devestated when she found out after the fact. In fact, there was a horribly uncomfortable Relief Society meeting where Emma shared her anger at what she thought were baseless rumors about Joseph's plural wives with what she thought were her closest friends, and several in the room were Joseph's plural wives themselves.
Clearly, Joseph was between a rock and a hard place and had to choose between the Lord's commandments/lying to his wife and appeasing his wife/defying the Lord. He chose to do as the Lord was commanding, but he did it in spite of Emma and her verocious, heartbroken opposition to the very idea.
I have sympathy for Joseph and I do believe he was doing as the Lord commanded, but I'm with Emma and would feel as she did.
We will have to agree to disagree then, I've read quite a bit on the topic, Ill have to grab my copy of Rough Stone Rolling and try to read up on it again.
I must confess though I am very guarded in taking what Emma said about polygamy at face value.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
We are not agreeing to disagree - this isn't an opinion thing. You're wrong in thinking that Emma knew all along and agreed to it.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
Katharina is correct by my understanding, but I think that BlackBlade is partially correct as well. Emma found out many years after Joseph started marrying additional wives. But at one point she did consent to it, and I believe even attended the ceremony of one or two of Joseph's new wives. Later in her life, she claimed that Joseph never practiced polygamy.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Heh. Obviously, somewhere there is a fact - the truth about whether Emma knew or not, and whether she agreed to it or not. But for us, knowing what someone else knew and how they felt - especially when that person is dead and we can't ask them - is difficult, and different opinions can be formed on whether we choose to believe source A or source B.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
What source are you claiming to support that Emma was always aware of her husband's other wives? So far as I'm aware, this isn't disputed by any historians. I'd be curious to see what sources you feel refute this.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Still, you can't fabricate something and claim it happened because we can't trust the evidence to the contrary.
I don't think Black Blade did that. I do, however, think there is, in general, a serious sugar-coating of the history of polygamy and BB's impression that Emma was in on it from the beginning comes from that. It was horribly hard and the Nauvoo years tore up marriages and testimonies as surely as it created others. I don't think it benefits us to pretend that didn't happen.
*shrug* I don't have any sources on me, am at work, and can't look right now, but I'll post tonight or tomorrow.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Still, you can't fabricate something and claim it happened because we can't trust the evidence to the contrary.
I don't think Black Blade did that. I do, however, think there is, in general, a serious sugar-coating of the history of polygamy and BB's impression that Emma was in on it from the beginning comes from that. It was horribly hard and the Nauvoo years tore up marriages and testimonies as surely as it created others. I don't think it benefits us to pretend that didn't happen.
*shrug* I don't have any sources on me, am at work, and can't look right now, but I'll post tonight or tomorrow.
Look I clearly have my recollection of what I have read on the subject just as you have yours. We have both independantly read material on the subject. I am merely saying that what you wrote is not as I understood it to be. You may very well be right, and you are right to be confident in your own interpretation of the evidence.
Look there are specifics to the situation I do not think any historian can put their fingers on. In the general sense this is how I believe things were.
By Emma being, "in on it" I do not neccesarily mean she was present at every ceremony and gave the OK. I am pretty sure she said OK to Joseph's second wife and severely resented it afterwards. By wife three or four she was extremely angry at the whole concept and believed it to be a system devised to give men harems for no good reason but sex. She frequently voiced these opinions to Joseph and would get extremely upset when he shacked up with any of his other wives for the night. It then behooved Joseph to not be as open with his activities with other wives, as Emma was unstable in how she handled the situation. One day she'd be completely OK with everything and the next extremely hostile.
Look I am going back to read up on it, I am quite capable of admitting to having an imperfect memory. Or being flat out wrong in my perception of a books materials.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I do need to go and look at various sources. I think you're wrong about Emma knowing about it and ever consenting to it, though.
She may have occasionaly, you know, tolerated it, but that isn't the same.
quote: It then behooved Joseph to not be as open with his activities with other wives, as Emma was unstable in how she handled the situation. One day she'd be completely OK with everything and the next extremely hostile.
I have to tell you, I really hate this sentence. Her husband was sleeping other women. I doubt she was ever "completely okay", and getting wildly angry does NOT make her unstable. In fact, I think labelling her as being unstable because she was angry at the continued betrayal is doing her and reality a disservice. It's really sexist. She wasn't flipping out because he didn't pick up the dry cleaning. She was angry because he was sleeping with other women and it wasn't going to change.
Of course, if you can claim she's being "unstable", then you don't have to take her and her objections seriously.
Posted by Valentine014 (Member # 5981) on :
Mrs. M, interesting. I don't remember that detail about the scene. I will have to go back and watch it.
I have to say, Jewish rules or not, it's not usually customary to put your head in your father's lap, as an adult, that is.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
My thoughts on that scene were that the family has very unusual dynamics. I don't think Nikki was abused. I do think that the only way Roman knows how to show affection to females is not a normal way to show affection between daughters and fathers. I also agree with whomever said Nikki reverts to acting like a child around her father.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:I have to tell you, I really hate this sentence. Her husband was sleeping other women. I doubt she was ever "completely okay", and getting wildly angry does NOT make her unstable. In fact, I think labelling her as being unstable because she was angry at the continued betrayal is doing her and reality a disservice. It's really sexist. She wasn't flipping out because he didn't pick up the dry cleaning. She was angry because he was sleeping with other women and it wasn't going to change.
I'm just calling it how I see it. I know I sound like I have no empathy for Emma Smith, I honestly do. But I think critics of polygamy often have little to no sympathy for Joseph. It's so easy to just think, "Well Smith was a horny man so of course polygamy was appealing to him." The part where an angel appeared to Smith and told him, "Reveal this principle or you will be removed from your place," gets little to no attention in the matter.
When I say that Emma was unstable I don't mean crazy, I mean she would come to Joseph one day and say in effect, "I've been praying about this, as it has been eating me up inside, and God gave me peace last night." Only to later say, "I don't believe this is of God anymore." She did ultimately say in effect after Joseph's death, "Joseph Smith never believed in Polygamy it was all made up by Sidney Rigdon or Brigham Young." Maybe she told Joseph what he wanted to hear, and maybe she actually went against what God actually told her, who can know but Emma herself?
Again I completely sympathize with Emma, as I said before if polygamy came back I don't think I would EVER participate in it unless commanded to do so by God himself, or if both me and my wife agreed to it. Again I just get frustrated when polygamy is presented as a sort of, "Harems in colonial America," concept. I honestly believe that Smith and Brigham young and many of those men had just as hard a time accepting polygamy as they did the move west.
Posted by MattB (Member # 1116) on :
Amancer's post of 12:14 is essentially accurate. Indeed, Section 132 of the D&C was given in order to induce Emma into accepting polygamy. Apparently, it worked for a time. King and Newell, in their still standard biography of Emma, make a fairly strong case that she participated in several of Joseph's later plural weddings.
However, she found out about polygamy late, and was never entirely reconciled to it. There's lots of stories floating around about it - the famous "pushing Eliza down the stairs" incident (which doesn't seem to have any primary source support); Brigham Young's (who hated Emma) accusation that she tried to poison Joseph (which a couple of primary sources lend some credence to). And, after Brigham and his followers left Nauvoo, she taught Joseph III that his father never engaged in the practice.
Fascinating, tragic figure.
BB - I appreciate your willingness to think about both sides; however, I think it's doubtful Emma's reversals were as dramatic as you depict. I doubt she ever felt she had a 'testimony' of polygamy; rather, she accepted it only grudgingly because she believed Joseph was a prophet and she loved him. She was never happy about it.
For what it's worth, I certainly agree that polygamy did not have roots in Joseph's horniness. However, I'm not sure believing that is incompatible with Emma being horrified by it.
By the way, Brigham Young hated the idea when he first heard of it, as did Hyrum. They both swallowed their nausea, however. Sidney Rigdon never accepted it - he and Joseph had a titanic fight after Joseph proposed to Rigdon's daughter without warning Sidney first (Nancy Rigdon turned him down). That's why Joseph never invited the Rigdon family to be endowed.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:Originally posted by MattB: Amancer's post of 12:14 is essentially accurate. Indeed, Section 132 of the D&C was given in order to induce Emma into accepting polygamy. Apparently, it worked for a time. King and Newell, in their still standard biography of Emma, make a fairly strong case that she participated in several of Joseph's later plural weddings.
However, she found out about polygamy late, and was never entirely reconciled to it. There's lots of stories floating around about it - the famous "pushing Eliza down the stairs" incident (which doesn't seem to have any primary source support); Brigham Young's (who hated Emma) accusation that she tried to poison Joseph (which a couple of primary sources lend some credence to). And, after Brigham and his followers left Nauvoo, she taught Joseph III that his father never engaged in the practice.
Fascinating, tragic figure.
BB - I appreciate your willingness to think about both sides; however, I think it's doubtful Emma's reversals were as dramatic as you depict. I doubt she ever felt she had a 'testimony' of polygamy; rather, she accepted it only grudgingly because she believed Joseph was a prophet and she loved him. She was never happy about it.
For what it's worth, I certainly agree that polygamy did not have roots in Joseph's horniness. However, I'm not sure believing that is incompatible with Emma being horrified by it.
By the way, Brigham Young hated the idea when he first heard of it, as did Hyrum. They both swallowed their nausea, however. Sidney Rigdon never accepted it - he and Joseph had a titanic fight after Joseph proposed to Rigdon's daughter without warning Sidney first (Nancy Rigdon turned him down). That's why Joseph never invited the Rigdon family to be endowed.
Thanks, Matt. I was under the impression that she was never okay with it, but it sounds like she accepted it as inevitable at least for a little while (although that's not the same as being at peace).
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
MattB: Thanks for the extended post, much of what you say sounds about right, and that which I am not certain is certainly plausible if not consistant with what I already knew about those involved.
calling Emma a facinating, tragic figure is exactly as I would describe her.
quote:For what it's worth, I certainly agree that polygamy did not have roots in Joseph's horniness. However, I'm not sure believing that is incompatible with Emma being horrified by it.
Completely agree.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
What's the rest of the story? What did Emma and her son do after the main group moved westward?
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
Emma got remarried to a man completely opposite of Joseph Smith; non-spiritual and a bit of a bar hopper. However, both of them seemed to have a good relationship. She helped Joseph Smith's mother (who stayed behind for health reasons) until she died.
Joseph Smith III, with the urging of some aquantances of Joseph Smith Jr., organized the Reorganized LDS Church (now called "Community of Christ). He remained the President of that Church until he died.
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
Emma and her children stayed in Nauvoo. She re-married a local farmer named Louis Bidamon. He and Emma raised the children and attempted to keep the Smith family business going. She died in 1879 and never was reconciled with the "Utah Church"
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
Here is a link with a quick history. Just scroll down to "later years in Nauvoo" for the rest of the story.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Hmm. The wiki you linked to said Joseph Smith, Jr. died of gunshot wounds. I thought he died in the fire.
Also, did he have children with any of his other wives?
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
He was shot and fell out the window of his jail cell.
Whether he had children with other wives is difficult to prove, although there are those who said they were his children. They went by other names.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
What fire? The Nauvoo Temple fire? That was started years after his death and after the majority of LDS had started for Utah. Other than that, I have no idea what you are talking about.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Dood Nikki is growing on me. She's so cool! Barb was like, "You can't do that, bad Nikki." And she likes tools. She rocks!
But she's still stupid for using credit cards too much.
*Has to try not to buy Tori Amos's new cd with my c card I have not activated.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Syn, I swear I read this exact post before. Did I?
Margene is the one growing on me. She cracks me up. I think we will see some interesting plot twists because of her. I am definitely thinking a tryst with her "son." (Barb's oldest boy)
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
"What fire?"
I thought there was a fire at the jail the day he died.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
No. No fire at the jail.
Joseph died at the window in a rain of gunfire and fell out the window. Hyrum, his brother, was shot and died in the room. John Taylor and...theotherguy...were shot but survived.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Willard Richards ... IIRC.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Willard Richards was unhurt.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
"Joseph died at the window in a rain of gunfire and fell out the window."
Actually, more like tried to jump out of the window, although that is arguable. Considering how high up and small the window was (I have been there) I will go with jumped.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I have been there as well. Whatever the reason for the defenestration, he didn't die in the room.
Willard Richards! That's right. We were just talking about Willard being an oh-so-Mormon name - apparently Mitt Romney's first name is Willard. I'd go by Mitt too.
W. Richards wasn't hit at all? Clearly all the hurt-but-not-dead stories I am thinking of belong to John Taylor.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: No. No fire at the jail.
Joseph died at the window in a rain of gunfire and fell out the window. Hyrum, his brother, was shot and died in the room. John Taylor and...theotherguy...were shot but survived.
Boy, I missed more episodes than I was aware I had missed!
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
From Wikipedia:
Richards was incarcerated in Carthage Jail with Joseph Smith, Jr., Hyrum Smith and John Taylor on the 27th of June 1844 when the jail was attacked by a mob and the LDS prophet and his brother were murdered. Taylor was shot four times and severely injured, but survived the attack. Richards was unhurt and so supervised the removal of Taylor and the bodies. His first-hand account of the event was published in the "Times and Seasons," Vol.5, No.14, (1. Aug. 1844), titled, "Two Minutes in Jail."
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Willard Richards is commonly said to have escaped the encounter, "without so much as a hole in his robe."
I recall there being a prophecy about that but I cannot be certain.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
Sorry Elizabeth, it was a rather amazing episode.
Oh, I mean . . . yea, a couple different topics going on. One about the show, and another about real history.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Wait, I thought Willard Richards was the one who was shot at but the bullet got stopped by a watch in his pocket, so he wasn't hurt.
Or was that John Taylor? I know he was hurt - but was his life spared because of the watch in the pocket that saved his life from "that" bullet?
Posted by MattB (Member # 1116) on :
What happened in the room:
The four men present were Joseph, Hyrum, John Taylor, and Willard Richards. Hyrum was then presiding patriarch and associate president, Taylor and Richards were apostles.
The mob came up the stairs; the Smith brothers and Richards tried to hold the door shut, but failed. The first volley of shots went through the oak door; Hyrum was hit just to the side of the nose and collapsed. Joseph knelt beside him; the door was forced open and Richards was trapped behind it - thus, never hit. Joseph then stood and unloaded his revolver into the mob, hitting several. He then ran for the window. John Taylor began laying about him with a cane. The second volley of shots hit Joseph as he went through the glass; Taylor was also hit several times, but his large pocketwatch stopped the most dangerous bullet.
Joseph had a couple of bullets in him when he went out the window; the mob turned and went back down the stairs.
The room was on the second floor. Joseph leaped through the window crying "Oh, Lord, my God," which is the opening line of the Masonic cry of distress, though Joseph apparently never said the second part: "Is there no help for the widow's son?" He was not quite dead when he hit the ground. He leaned up against a well in the yard, and died there.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
Religious tolerance wasn't, then, what it is today.
Now some Hatracker will try and prove me wrong.
It'll happen within 15 minutes after this post.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
Steven, I personally think that law and order isn't the same today as it was back then. As for religious intolerance, it is just better kept in check. It might be better now than then.
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
quote:Religious tolerance wasn't, then, what it is today
Neither is the National Guard. The shooters were the Carthage Greys, a local militia unit, under the command of a couple of evangalical ministers.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
"evangalical ministers." I don't think that term is historically true. Many were very mainstream Christian.
Edit Note: the event occured June 27, 1844.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Was "evangelical" as we understand it now even a thing back in 1846? I thought what we know as the present-day evangelical movement didn't really get going until the late 1800s.
Posted by steven (Member # 8099) on :
If I remember my history correctly, there have been several periods of greater fervency since the late 1700s.
You don't need law and order if you already have religious tolerance. Teach someone well when they are young, and you don't have to buy a burglar alarm and hire extra police. But, hey, that's not the point of this thread. Forgive me for derailing.
Posted by MattB (Member # 1116) on :
quote:The shooters were the Carthage Greys, a local militia unit, under the command of a couple of evangalical ministers.
This is inaccurate. The mob was largely, but not exclusively, made up of Greys; however, it was not "commanded" by evangelical ministers. Indeed, it's still unclear who exactly was involved, but there was only one minister among those accused, Levi Williams, a lay, part-time Baptist preacher and a fulltime farmer. Characterizing it as an evangelical plot is incorrect. Indeed, the mob was not really functioning "under the orders" of anyone - Governor Ford had left the Greys to guard the Smiths, but their ranks were rife with members suspicious of Mormons, and the mob action had no official sanction.
quote:"evangalical ministers." I don't think that term is historically true. Many were very mainstream Christian.
By this point in American history, evangelical was mainstream. By 1852, there were more members of either evangelical denominations that had appeared in the First Great Awakening (like the Baptists and Methodists) or evangelical wings of older denominations like the Presbyterians and Congregationalists than voted in that year's presidential election. About one out of every five Americans was an evangelical - nearly five million out of a population of 27 million.
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
I didn't use the term "evangalical plot". I was refering more to the conduct of a milita that was "called out" by civil authority, but not commanded by a regularly commissioned officer corps like they are today. The "officers" tended to be those who talked the loudest. (They were elected, usually by voice vote or aclamation.) But, I believe it was clear that the event was planned, coordinated and communicated in advance, hence my use of the phrase "under orders".
[ June 19, 2007, 06:15 PM: Message edited by: Artemisia Tridentata ]
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
Originally posted by MattB: "Hyrum was hit just to the side of the nose and collapsed"
You can see the entry point of the musket ball and resultant damaged flesh in Hyrum's death mask in the church museum in SLC. Quite moving, I found, seeing that.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
quote:Originally posted by Occasional: Sorry Elizabeth, it was a rather amazing episode.
Oh, I mean . . . yea, a couple different topics going on. One about the show, and another about real history.
Occasional, I was being a smart-a**.
In fact, though, it proves the point that we fifth grade teachers make all the time: "You can;t make this (stuff) up."
Truly, the more fiction I read and watch, the more I realize that real life is far more dramatic.
This story is fascinating and heartbreakingly sad to learn about.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Bill is going to spend the rest of his life having kids and committing minor sins of commission and omission to keep those kids fed and happy. The guy is worried about earning daily bread for his family and gaining entrance into the celestial kingdom, and since his family is so big, he doesn't spend any effort worrying about anything else.
Rhonda and Niki are the other two who have left the compound now, and both have serious issues trusting anyone - and, consequently, of being worthy of trust from anyone.
After this episode, I'm much more interested in seeing how the compound affects those who leave it. Bill's obsession with providing for his family is the extreme opposite of being abandoned in the name of maintaining the community, which is what happened to him as a young boy. He was literally left on a street corner.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
MattB: Some of the specifics don't seem to really mesh with accounts I have heard of Joseph Smith's death. But the general feel of your post seems correct.
1: Joseph Smith saying, "Oh Lord My God." Could be the opening lines of a masonic distress, but it could also be the opening lines of just about any Christian's prayer.
2: I do not believe Joseph Smith leaned up against a well and died, he fell from the second story window of the prison and landed who knows how ungracefully, its doubtful he landed on his feet. There were many men outside firing guns as well its doubtful he got up and walked over to a well, leaned against it and died. More likely he died as he was falling if not on impact, IF not when the mob fired bullets into his body repeatedly to make sure the deed was done.
Posted by Cashew (Member # 6023) on :
He didn't get up and walk over to the well, he lay dying from gunshot wounds where he had landed, was hauled over to the side of the well where he was then shot to death. There was a report from someone in the mob that there was an attempt to cut off his head for the bounty, but there was a call of, "The Mormons are coming", meaning the Nauvoo Militia, and the crowd melted away. The Nauvoo Miltia was never activated however. There was also a report I read in Fawn Brodie's book (also from a mob member) that just as the attempt was made to behead Joseph a ray of light broke through the clouds and shone on his body, scaring the 'beheader' off. I've never read anything about that in any Church literature about the assassinaton, so I guess it's apocryphal, but I've seen an engraving depicting it, and both the account and engraving were in Brodie's book, generally considered anti.
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
). I am nothing like her, and neither are almost all of the other Jewish women I know.
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
But say it happened in ten years. It comes down to I trust my husband and the Lord that much. I would be willing to give it a try. And on his part, he wouldn't think of it if I didn't do the wife-choosing. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)