Should I write Midgley's biography?

[Moksha]

I like that Dr. Midgley had to guts to call BS on Cleon Skousen's BS. Did he ever say anything about the John Birch machinations of Reed Benson at BYU?

[Marcus]

Ah. Is this his complaint about Marjorie Newton, and her own comments about how the LDS Church has historically preferred to present Māori history?

https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... appraisal/

Midgley’s two main beefs seem to be that (1) Newton doesn’t enthusiastically enough promote the sensationalized ‘prophesy’ of (primarily) a particular tribal member, and (2) that she incorrectly identifies Hagoth and crew as Lamanites more times than she does as Nephites. This leads to Midgley being aghast that Newton presumably then characterizes Māori as (gasp!) descendants of Lamanites, instead of being descendants of Nephites....

Gasp! indeed. Here's another part of his review:

...In addition, she does not address the fact that Southerton’s attack was on the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon and hence was not an argument that confines Lehites and their remote ancestors to a limited area...

Just think about this. Midgley acknowledges Southerton is arguing against historicity. So... fiction.

But, Midgley insists that arguing that none of it is real [i.e., fiction] STILL leaves open the possibility that the non-real [fictional] ancestors can be from a non-limited [fictional] area.

You canNOT make this stuff up.

[Marcus]

Midgley explains his negative review of Marjorie Newton:

Finally, at the risk of being seen as immodest, I must point out that, in addition to not genuinely engaging the work of those Newton clearly denigrates as “Mormon apologists” (MNZ, 275)—that is, those who advance “the Mormon faithful history interpretation” (M&M, 1) of the grounds and contents of the faith of Māori Saints — she has ignored two of my own essays.

https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... tnote23anc

Apparently those editing the Saints, volume 3, did the same.

[Dr. Shades]

Are your first three paragraphs a quote from someone else, Binger? ‘Cause they totally don’t sound like you. At all.

[Binger]

Are your first three paragraphs a quote from someone else, Binger? ‘Cause they totally don’t sound like you. At all.

Totally me. And not written with anything but my best no hard feelings temple intentions.

I really truly think you should avoid writing a biography of someone you dislike and don't know. I am not saying that this character is likable. I certainly do not see anything appealing. I just think it not a worthwhile task with a reasonable probability of success.

Here is an example of what I am talking about. How could anyone take a biography about Midgley seriously without having personal input from the primary obsession of this board, Daniel Peterson? What would your process be to get any insight, personal information, or original information from Daniel? And why on earth would he cooperate with you?

If your answer is that original information is not relevant or needed, or that the insight of friends, family and coworkers is not necessary, then you aren't really writing a biography of a living person, you are just copying and pasting blogs, forum posts and tweets.

[Shulem]

Please let me know if writing Midgley's biography will be worthwhile or if I should drop the idea like a hot potato, much as it would pain me to do so.

I'm in full agreement with Binger on this one. Drop it. Don't do it. Use your talents for something else more fruitful.

That's my opinion.

[Dr. Shades]

I have met Midgley. Twice. And what makes you think I wouldn’t solicit an interview with Daniel Peterson regarding him?

[Binger]

I have met Midgley. Twice. And what makes you think I wouldn’t solicit an interview with Daniel Peterson regarding him?

What makes me think that? Your role in hosting this board that obsesses over him makes me think that.

I am not saying this to shoot you down or dismiss your talents. I am saying this based on the reality of the situation and your part in the history of Midgely, Peterson and apologetics.

Find something useful to do with your interests and talents.

[Gadianton]

I have met Midgley. Twice. And what makes you think I wouldn’t solicit an interview with Daniel Peterson regarding him?

I hope you also at least try to get an interview with Kiwi57.

[dastardly stem]

That's some serious food for thought, Physics Guy. My motive is because Louis Midgley fascinates me. A man who is so stridently devoted to a cause whose most fundamental teachings he so blatantly violates on a near-daily basis. . . what's not to love? A sub-motive is that I want to learn what makes Louis tick, if that's even possible. How he can justify acting the way he does, with the clearest of consciences, is a mystery I'd love to solve.

I don't think there's much mystery here at all. Jesus wants followers to fight for him, in some of his moods. Jesus' story has him hating many many people. And Midgley likely isn't even that bad. I mean I've gotten wind of his antics too, but they are tame to Jesus' hope that families hate each other in order to truly love their Lord. Why can't MIdgley be the guy who'd fix his neighbors fence and afterward get online to demean those who oppose his Jesus? He could one day give his great great grandkid a hug and sage advice, and then turn around and deride a New Zealander for her lack of character and her opposition to his Jesus.

I'd say write it. I can't imagine many would want to read it. But do it if you feel passionate about it.