Torches at High Noon: A Fog Machine, Power Lines, An Angry Extra and Brigham Young’s Electric Boogaloo

[huckelberry]

I don't see what the problem is, or why people are taking time to make fun of this.

He's one of the core focuses of this board, being the most prominent Mopologist. He makes a lot of unsubstantiated quick snips at this board, and ex-Mormons in general. This board often does the same.

Personally I'm not that bothered by it, and I think it's mostly amusing and taken with a big grain of salt on both sides.

Taking this light approach I found Peterson pleasant. I am happy he enjoys a good meal. I thought the fog and torches a bit melodramatic. I was unable to detect powerlines and such errors, I tried. I thought the tired bored fellow in jail with Joseph was the best acting , I could just feel like being in jail with these two fellows in their Sunday best white shirts.

[drumdude]

DCP says there's at least a year's worth of these videos queued up - a new one to talk about each week! In a world where TV shows only release 8 episodes every 5 years, that's actually going to be something fun to look forward to.

[Shulem]

I could just feel like being in jail with these two fellows in their Sunday best white shirts.

And eat like a jail-mate and poop and pee in a common bucket, buddy.

AI informed me that it was a "hot and humid summer day" on Jun 27, 1844, wherein the high temp was 88-92 deg. Willard Richard's journal notes the "oppressive heat."

The crisp clean clothes they were wearing and their dry faces is another Mormon lie to add to all the other lies of Mormonism.

Daniel Peterson, you're a dirty liar and skunk! Your religion is fake! Your film sucks.

[Gadianton]

The lower-ranking folks can share the freebies, but by no means are they permitted to have them on their own. The expense account and the reimbursements are first and foremost for the President and his fellow senior executives.

That's too bad. It would have been a nice gesture, then again, "nicey nice" isn't exactly the theme song of Mopologetics.

Meanwhile, I wonder a bit about your analogy. Does the fast offering funding actually go to needy families? I was under the impression that the money just went into some general fund--maybe into Ensign Peak's holdings, for example--and then Ensign Peak would single out some charity or another to throw some money at as a tax write-off. Maybe something similar could work for Interpreter?

That's a probing question. We might not be able to help the lower rung but the executives could be in for a treat. Suppose our executive forgoes the optional snack and we put that money in an investment fund. We're going to go high risk, given the Lord's hand will be upon it to see it safe. Well, now it's bearing interest, and we should use mark-to-market accounting here, as Enron did, but with the Lord's hand. So now we can take the present value of that investment long term and wash it out like this, looking at the lower half of the form:

----
optional snack 1 [forgone]
optional snack 2 popcorn 4$
optional snack 3 Twinkies 5$

Using the model you suggest we're able to get the executives a little more comfort. I guess that counts for something.

[Doctor Scratch]

Reverend—

I definitely appreciate your generosity. And I agree: the film is basically anodyne. And yet, there are aspects of the project that I struggle to overlook. One is the repellent smugness of the Mopologists in light of the “handover” of the temple from the CoC. This BY project is, without a doubt, an anti-CoC project. It’s meant to belittle the CoC’s claims to the prophetic mantle of Joseph Smith.

But the fundamental problem, in my view, is what they are defending. I mean: a *YEAR’s* worth of films defending BY? Really? Is this a person who really merits such a thing? Is this really a historical figure who deserves celebrating in that way?

I’m trying to think of an equivalent: Hitler or Stalin, of course, would be dismissed (and rightly so) as over-the-top. So…Pinochet? Andrew Jackson? Like, a project arguing that we need to “raise a voice” for Andrew Jackson, and elevate his status among US statesmen? Pinochet has been unfairly maligned? Sure: these leaders were not as bad as Hitler or Pol Pot, etc. But their track record was seriously problematic—so much so that apologetic efforts at rehabbing their reputations seems…problematic.

[Tom]

I am very much looking forward to Saturday’s fireside on the Bowdlerizing Brigham docuseries. I plan to bring a large pan of Lion House Rolls to share.


Brigham Young regularly made soft rolls from scratch for visitors to the Lion House (shown above) to feast on. He was famously known for vigorously scrubbing his hands with soap and water before working in the kitchen.

With any luck the evening’s entertainment will include a musical surprise from John and Twyla Wilson (who played Brigham and Mary Ann Angell Young in Six Days) treating the congregation to a very special vocal performance of the classic hymn “Brother Brigham Says.” Here are the lyrics:

1. Brother Brigham says that if you plan an exodus, organize and carefully prepare.
Brother Brigham says you’re sure to travel hungry if you only bring a wagon and a prayer.
Brother Brigham says: “Lend a hand to your neighbor and help one another cross the plains.”
Brother Brigham says wheat is better than gold,
Brother Brigham says so, and now you’ve been told.
Brother Brigham says: “Use your brawn but don’t forget your brain.”

2. Brother Brigham says that obstacles and difficulties never from a target should deter.
Brother Brigham says: “Obliterate the obdurate. Never let a stroke of fate occur.”
Brother Brigham says: “Try a little bit of muscle plus faith and a little energy.”
Brother Brigham says poor is better than rich.
Brother Brigham says: “Take your turn, dig a ditch.”
Brother Brigham says: “Do your best.” And brother so do we!

3. Brother Brigham says that cleanlines is holiness, just as much as charity and hope.
Brother Brigham says that water makes you pure and holy if you only don’t forget the soap.
Brother Brigham says: “Scrub the knees and the elbows; don’t forget to get behind the ears.”
Brother Brigham says minor Saints should be scrubbed.
Brother Brigham says: “Take your turn in the tub.”
Brother Brigham says no one loves a dirty pioneer.

4. Brother Brigham says that here among the mountains we can build our homes and raise our families.
Brother Brigham says that here the Saints will gather from foreign lands and far across the seas.
Brother Brigham says we will build towns and cities as far as the eye of man can see.
Brother Brigham says now the future looks great.
Brother Brigham, you know we can hardly wait.
But Brother Brigham, do you suppose someday we’ll have a tree?

I also hope that the Proprietor will perform a dramatic reading of Don Searle’s poem “Becoming Brigham.” Here are the timeless words:

Cut and fasten, sand and smooth,
Brigham was a worker in wood.
Of grain and fit and strength he knew;
What work he did, it stood.
A careful man, he did not go
With any wind that blew,
But weighed and thought and pondered,
And acted when he knew.
So it was with faith,
For he weighed the gospel well,
And when at length he knew,
He anchored heart and will.
No eager taker of the mantle
To prophet-teacher given,
He bore it nobly when it fell,
And bent his will to heaven’s.
So it is with other prophets,
Each, like Brigham in his way,
Never seeking for the role,
Ever faithful to obey.
For each was ready at the call—
None’s life was bent by careless choice—
Each prepared by heaven’s tutelage
To hear and heed the Master’s voice.

In any case, it promises to be a memorable evening.

Posted from Sheep Dip, Utah

[I Have Questions]

Reverend—
I definitely appreciate your generosity. And I agree: the film is basically anodyne. And yet, there are aspects of the project that I struggle to overlook. One is the repellent smugness of the Mopologists in light of the “handover” of the temple from the CoC. This BY project is, without a doubt, an anti-CoC project. It’s meant to belittle the CoC’s claims to the prophetic mantle of Joseph Smith.

But the fundamental problem, in my view, is what they are defending. I mean: a *YEAR’s* worth of films defending BY? Really? Is this a person who really merits such a thing? Is this really a historical figure who deserves celebrating in that way?

I’m trying to think of an equivalent: Hitler or Stalin, of course, would be dismissed (and rightly so) as over-the-top. So…Pinochet? Andrew Jackson? Like, a project arguing that we need to “raise a voice” for Andrew Jackson, and elevate his status among US statesmen? Pinochet has been unfairly maligned? Sure: these leaders were not as bad as Hitler or Pol Pot, etc. But their track record was seriously problematic—so much so that apologetic efforts at rehabbing their reputations seems…problematic.

But Doctor Scratch, you have already answered your own conundrum. This isn’t about defending a Church figure, this is about generating content to justify a lifestyle paid for by donations. Brigham Young is just the current vehicle. He wanted (believed he deserved) Bradford’s job at The Maxwell, failed, and so invented his own job. Getting others to fund it the way the Church funds The Maxwell. Interpreter is just a grown ups dolls house.

I think that if you view Interpreter as a content creator, when content = income, like a YouTube Channel, it makes more sense. The regularity of pushing something out is what matters, it’s volume that drives revenue. And you have to take your hat off to him, he gets others to produce the material he benefits from pushing out. It’s a well thought out ruse, getting others to fund his travel habit.

[Tom]

I found one exchange in episode 1 to be noteworthy:

Peterson: So [Willard Richards’] account of [the martyrdom] was published in the Times and Seasons, which was the Nauvoo newspaper at the time. It’s important because it was published fairly soon after the martyrdom. So, we have not only an eyewitness account, but an almost contemporaneous account, one that was written while the memories are fresh and so on. And as far as historical writing and research goes, that’s the gold standard. That’s what you really want.

Wilson: That’s different from someone recalling it two years later and writing it down.

Peterson: Yeah, because memories change, shift, and so on.

Fox: I can’t remember anything like two days later.

Peterson: Right.
=================
I am reminded that contemporaneous records from Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, William Clayton, Heber C. Kimball, Willard Richards, and Thomas Bullock fail to mention anything out of the ordinary pertaining to Brigham Young’s August 8 address in Nauvoo. Those records do not mention seeing changes in Young's appearance or voice or witnessing any attendees exclaiming during Young's address that they saw or heard Joseph Smith.

[malkie]

I found one exchange in episode 1 to be noteworthy:

Peterson: So [Willard Richards’] account of [the martyrdom] was published in the Times and Seasons, which was the Nauvoo newspaper at the time. It’s important because it was published fairly soon after the martyrdom. So, we have not only an eyewitness account, but an almost contemporaneous account, one that was written while the memories are fresh and so on. And as far as historical writing and research goes, that’s the gold standard. That’s what you really want.

Wilson: That’s different from someone recalling it two years later and writing it down.

Peterson: Yeah, because memories change, shift, and so on.

Fox: I can’t remember anything like two days later.

Peterson: Right.
=================
I am reminded that contemporaneous records from Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, William Clayton, Heber C. Kimball, Willard Richards, and Thomas Bullock fail to mention anything out of the ordinary pertaining to Brigham Young’s August 8 address in Nauvoo. Those records do not mention seeing changes in Young's appearance or voice or witnessing any attendees exclaiming during Young's address that they saw or heard Joseph Smith.

"That’s different from someone recalling it two years later and writing it down."

Remind me: how long after the First Vision did Joseph write about his experience? (answer: 12 years, or roughly 4000 days)

If "memories change, shift, and so on", I wonder how Peterson would suggest should we regard not just the first, but each of the progressively later accounts.

[I Have Questions]

I found one exchange in episode 1 to be noteworthy:

Peterson: So [Willard Richards’] account of [the martyrdom] was published in the Times and Seasons, which was the Nauvoo newspaper at the time. It’s important because it was published fairly soon after the martyrdom. So, we have not only an eyewitness account, but an almost contemporaneous account, one that was written while the memories are fresh and so on. And as far as historical writing and research goes, that’s the gold standard. That’s what you really want.

Wilson: That’s different from someone recalling it two years later and writing it down.

Peterson: Yeah, because memories change, shift, and so on.

Fox: I can’t remember anything like two days later.

Peterson: Right.
=================
I am reminded that contemporaneous records from Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, William Clayton, Heber C. Kimball, Willard Richards, and Thomas Bullock fail to mention anything out of the ordinary pertaining to Brigham Young’s August 8 address in Nauvoo. Those records do not mention seeing changes in Young's appearance or voice or witnessing any attendees exclaiming during Young's address that they saw or heard Joseph Smith.

Remind me, how soon after it happened did Joseph Smith recount the First Vision account?