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

[Shulem]

The view numbers are grim:

Episode 1: 32k
Episode 2: 12k
Episode 3: 8k
Episode 4: 8k
Episode 5: 5k
Episode 6: 5k
Episode 7: 4k
Episode 8: 2k

Very, very, grim.

Obviously, today's Latter-day Saints (17 million) don't have an appetite for Peterson's crap. He needs to stop what he's doing and find a hobby.

[I Have Questions]

Peterson is clearly overjoyed at yet another rip roaring success on the back of his previous two box office sensations…

Do the members of your Relief Society, your priesthood quorum, your Sunday School class, and your ward know about Becoming Brigham? Do others in your family know about it? Do your neighbors? Are you aware of still others who might benefit by watching it, or who would be interested in seeing it? Can you help to spread the word?

Just another 70 glorious weekly episodes to go…

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Peterson is clearly overjoyed at yet another rip roaring success on the back of his previous two box office sensations…

Do the members of your Relief Society, your priesthood quorum, your Sunday School class, and your ward know about Becoming Brigham? Do others in your family know about it? Do your neighbors? Are you aware of still others who might benefit by watching it, or who would be interested in seeing it? Can you help to spread the word?

Just another 70 glorious weekly episodes to go…

Witness the miracle of Becoming Brigham. The only multi-million dollar epic no one requested, yet everyone is now expected to sell.

[drumdude]

DCP will likely be remembered in the same breath as Ken Burns, just give it time!

Does the disappearance of Maria Susanna Cummins from literary memory mean that she was a poor author? Does the fact that virtually nobody today has heard of The Lamplighter, let alone read it, demonstrate it to have been a bad book? I doubt it. But, never having previously heard of Ms. Cummins nor having ever seen her principal novel, I really can’t speak to its quality and I can have no opinion as to her abilities as a writer. Maybe The Lamplighter is worth a look. After all, more than a few authors, artists, and composers who seemed to have failed during their lifetimes (think of Vincent Van Gogh) or whose reputations went into profound eclipse after their deaths (think of Johann Sebastian Bach, before the “Bach Revival” spearheaded by such figures as Felix Mendelssohn and Albert Schweitzer) went on to eventual recognition in the pantheon of greats. (The starving artist is almost proverbial.)

But neither do the low sales figures for Moby-Dick and for The Scarlet Letter prove those to be bad novels nor their authors to be bad writers. Both would now be included in just about any list of “canonical” novels and novelists.

Many films that failed commercially at the box office are now highly thought-of. For example, Blade Runner (1982) was a flop, but has since become recognized as a foundational masterpiece of science-fiction movie-making. The Shawshank Redemption (1994) was a major box-office failure, but is now frequently ranked as one of the greatest films ever made. It’s a Wonderful Life (1946) lost a significant amount of money for RKO Pictures, only being recognized as a classic, and becoming a beloved Christmas tradition many years later. And The Wizard of Oz (1939) didn’t make a profit until its re-releases and television broadcasting decades after its initial appearance.

BB isn’t bad, it’s just under appreciated!

[Tom]

It occurred to me while watching episode 8 of Bowdlerizing Brigham that I was listening to a Sunday School-level discussion. (It doesn’t help that Susan Easton Black is the guest.) Too bad.

As an aside, I’d note that Doctor Peterson stated in the same episode that Brigham Young was baptized April 14, 1832. I believe the best evidence supports a date of April 9, 1832. See Michael Marquardt, "Setting the Record Straight: Brigham Young's Baptism Date," Journal of Mormon History 38/4 (2012): 195-99.

I’d also note that the donation options on the series website remain the same. Inexplicably, there’s no option to contribute money directly to the series. Will this be fixed?

Finally, I’d note that the Proprietor has posted images of Wulf Barsch’s art on several occasions on his blog with a note such as the following: “I have been unable to find copyright information regarding this image of a work by a prominent contemporary LDS artist whom I admire, so, if anybody who holds copyright on it wishes to contact me, that would please me and put my mind at ease.” I find it exceedingly strange that rather than making an effort to reach out to the artist’s family or agent before posting the image, the Proprietor chooses to post the image with an invitation to “anybody who holds copyright on it to contact me.” I find that very disrespectful to the artist (who died last year) and his intellectual property.

Posted from Fruitland, Utah

[malkie]

It occurred to me while watching episode 8 of Bowdlerizing Brigham that I was listening to a Sunday School-level discussion. (It doesn’t help that Susan Easton Black is the guest.) Too bad.

As an aside, I’d note that Doctor Peterson stated in the same episode that Brigham Young was baptized April 14, 1832. I believe the best evidence supports a date of April 9, 1832. See Michael Marquardt, "Setting the Record Straight: Brigham Young's Baptism Date," Journal of Mormon History 38/4 (2012): 195-99.

I’d also note that the donation options on the series website remain the same. Inexplicably, there’s no option to contribute money directly to the series. Will this be fixed?

Finally, I’d note that the Proprietor has posted images of Wulf Barsch’s art on several occasions on his blog with a note such as the following: “I have been unable to find copyright information regarding this image of a work by a prominent contemporary LDS artist whom I admire, so, if anybody who holds copyright on it wishes to contact me, that would please me and put my mind at ease.” I find it exceedingly strange that rather than making an effort to reach out to the artist’s family or agent before posting the image, the Proprietor chooses to post the image with an invitation to “anybody who holds copyright on it to contact me.” I find that very disrespectful to the artist (who died last year) and his intellectual property.

Posted from Fruitland, Utah

I wonder if Dr P thinks that every potential "anybody" is an avid reader of his blog, and viewer of the BB series.

[Res Ipsa]

It occurred to me while watching episode 8 of Bowdlerizing Brigham that I was listening to a Sunday School-level discussion. (It doesn’t help that Susan Easton Black is the guest.) Too bad.

As an aside, I’d note that Doctor Peterson stated in the same episode that Brigham Young was baptized April 14, 1832. I believe the best evidence supports a date of April 9, 1832. See Michael Marquardt, "Setting the Record Straight: Brigham Young's Baptism Date," Journal of Mormon History 38/4 (2012): 195-99.

I’d also note that the donation options on the series website remain the same. Inexplicably, there’s no option to contribute money directly to the series. Will this be fixed?

Finally, I’d note that the Proprietor has posted images of Wulf Barsch’s art on several occasions on his blog with a note such as the following: “I have been unable to find copyright information regarding this image of a work by a prominent contemporary LDS artist whom I admire, so, if anybody who holds copyright on it wishes to contact me, that would please me and put my mind at ease.” I find it exceedingly strange that rather than making an effort to reach out to the artist’s family or agent before posting the image, the Proprietor chooses to post the image with an invitation to “anybody who holds copyright on it to contact me.” I find that very disrespectful to the artist (who died last year) and his intellectual property.

Posted from Fruitland, Utah

That's totally bizarre. Absent any indication that the copyright has been transferred, the artist owns the copyright. As he died recently, the appropriate thing to do would be to contact his estate or heirs. It's backwards to display the art and ask if anyone knows who owns the copyright. Ignorance is not an excuse to infringe.

[Res Ipsa]

It occurred to me while watching episode 8 of Bowdlerizing Brigham that I was listening to a Sunday School-level discussion. (It doesn’t help that Susan Easton Black is the guest.) Too bad.

As an aside, I’d note that Doctor Peterson stated in the same episode that Brigham Young was baptized April 14, 1832. I believe the best evidence supports a date of April 9, 1832. See Michael Marquardt, "Setting the Record Straight: Brigham Young's Baptism Date," Journal of Mormon History 38/4 (2012): 195-99.

I’d also note that the donation options on the series website remain the same. Inexplicably, there’s no option to contribute money directly to the series. Will this be fixed?

Finally, I’d note that the Proprietor has posted images of Wulf Barsch’s art on several occasions on his blog with a note such as the following: “I have been unable to find copyright information regarding this image of a work by a prominent contemporary LDS artist whom I admire, so, if anybody who holds copyright on it wishes to contact me, that would please me and put my mind at ease.” I find it exceedingly strange that rather than making an effort to reach out to the artist’s family or agent before posting the image, the Proprietor chooses to post the image with an invitation to “anybody who holds copyright on it to contact me.” I find that very disrespectful to the artist (who died last year) and his intellectual property.

Posted from Fruitland, Utah

That's totally bizarre. Absent any indication that the copyright has been transferred, the artist owns the copyright. As he died recently, the appropriate thing to do would be to contact his estate or heirs. It's backwards to display the art and ask if anyone knows who owns the copyright. Ignorance is not an excuse to infringe.

ETA: The Springville Art Museum has a collection of his work. That would be a good place to start.

[drumdude]

I, and 1300 others, tuned in to the latest episode over the last 14 hours.

Nielsen ratings are based off a survey of 40,000 TV viewers across the country. A “ten-share” is business speak for ten percent of TV viewers in a given night tuning into a particular program.

“Becoming Brigham” then, has about a tenth of a tenth of a tenth of a tenth share of all Mormon viewers last night.

[I Have Questions]

I, and 1300 others, tuned in to the latest episode over the last 14 hours.

Nielsen ratings are based off a survey of 40,000 TV viewers across the country. A “ten-share” is business speak for ten percent of TV viewers in a given night tuning into a particular program.

“Becoming Brigham” then, has about a tenth of a tenth of a tenth of a tenth share of all Mormon viewers last night.

Peterson is sounding a little desperate…

Amusingly, my Malevolent Stalker, who will soon enter into his second quarter of a century of anonymously denigrating and attacking me and all my works, occasionally likes to dismiss the Interpreter Foundation as nothing more than my personal vanity blog. And he’s completely justified in doing so, provided that one defines a blog as an organization that, among other things, publishes peer-reviewed articles every week, produces large and serious books, sponsors massive scholarly projects, convenes conferences, and creates films and provided that one defines personal as involving scores and scores and scores of people.

Okay Dan. You’re a titan of Mormon scholarship who will remembered for generations. Do you feel better now? Are you aware that your self indulgent rants about your own importance, victim hood, and popularity, are sounding very “Toddler In Chief” these days?