Dr. Shades wrote:I hope you'll forgive me if I respectfully disagree.
Shumway's photographs broad-brushed all Mormons (or at least the Happy Valley ones) as unsmiling homogenites (is that a word)?
And I disagree with you, as well as being shocked that you would take one guy's pictures of his own family as intended to be representative of "all Mormons." That's quite a stretch.
Those poor people must be dreadfully unhappy if they climb trees and kiss their sweeties. LOL!!!
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Darth J wrote:I can't imagine why anyone would think you're a hypocritical, disingenuous, raving lunatic, Ray.
You back again for more punishment? I'll deal with you in more detail tomorrow. But anyway, thanks for confirming that I'm not an "apologist" (tell your mates too).
Go back all you want, quote all you want, and keep establishing yourself as a little spiritually dead man with a pea brain.
You're such a fool. Really.
This post has been brought to by
And the letter C.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
DrW wrote:Daniel C. Peterson's comments make Mormons look far worse than all of Brian Shumway's captions and photographs and all of the other comments combined. (And that is saying a lot.)
I hope you'll forgive me if I respectfully disagree.
Shumway's photographs broad-brushed all Mormons (or at least the Happy Valley ones) as unsmiling homogenites (is that a word)?
I agree - so you are forgiven.
However, if you read the comments, you saw DCP was able to add disingenuous, defensive, arrogant, and paranoid (Dr. Scratch was mentioned by name) to the characteristics of Happy Valley Mormons as reflected on that media web page.
While the photographs (taken as a whole) were a bit disturbing, DCP's participation left no doubt about the arrogance, insecurity and even paranoia that typify LDS culture, especially as reflected by the apologists mentioned in the comments.
Hamblin's "Kicking Anti-Mormon Butt Since 19xx" avatar tagline on MDD comes to mind.
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."
DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
Kishkumen wrote:And I disagree with you, as well as being shocked that you would take one guy's pictures of his own family as intended to be representative of "all Mormons." That's quite a stretch.
Those poor people must be dreadfully unhappy if they climb trees and kiss their sweeties. LOL!!!
I agree. I am dismayed that I contributed to all the kerfuffle over the photos. I didn't think there was anything particularly controversial about them, and I certainly didn't see them as "broad-brushing all Mormons." These people are his family, not mine, not yours, and clearly his photos were meant to evoke his estrangement and reconciliation with his own family. I don't understand why anyone would think these were a "hit piece" against every Mormon in the world.
I'm reminded of the response one commenter had to my book. He accused me of making all missions out to be bad, awful experiences. Of course, I don't think my mission was bad or awful, but I certainly don't intend my book to be the last word on "what Mormon missions are like." It's about my mission, my experiences, my thoughts, my feelings. I think I was harder on myself in the book than I was on any other aspect of missionary life, which is again, because it's about my life.
The same is true of Shumway's photos. They are about his family and his experience. That I could relate to them and others can't shouldn't surprise anyone. But the overwrought responses baffle me.
Runtu wrote:I agree. I am dismayed that I contributed to all the kerfuffle over the photos. I didn't think there was anything particularly controversial about them, and I certainly didn't see them as "broad-brushing all Mormons." These people are his family, not mine, not yours, and clearly his photos were meant to evoke his estrangement and reconciliation with his own family. I don't understand why anyone would think these were a "hit piece" against every Mormon in the world.
I'm reminded of the response one commenter had to my book. He accused me of making all missions out to be bad, awful experiences. Of course, I don't think my mission was bad or awful, but I certainly don't intend my book to be the last word on "what Mormon missions are like." It's about my mission, my experiences, my thoughts, my feelings. I think I was harder on myself in the book than I was on any other aspect of missionary life, which is again, because it's about my life.
The same is true of Shumway's photos. They are about his family and his experience. That I could relate to them and others can't shouldn't surprise anyone. But the overwrought responses baffle me.
Bringing in your experience writing your book and receiving criticism of it was a great addition to the conversation. Thanks much, Runtu. I think it is odd in a world full of obviously individual perspectives and expressions, whether they be in popular music, memoirs and novels, art, or what have you, that there are still so many people who think that any public statement about an issue must be a totalizing statement of some kind, as though individual artistic endeavors were intended as Platonic Forms or some such. The real value in these things is not so much what they tell us about Mormonism, but rather what they tell us about this person's experience of Mormonism. And if people can't be bothered to reflect for a moment and appreciate that distinction, then it is no wonder we get so much pointless and destructive angst over such minor things as this.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Calling the photo series and accompanying essay a "hit piece", tells me that the people who claim it is so, are so steeped in bias that they are unable to exercise little consideration to just what it is that they are viewing.
The photo series is obviously a collaborative work between Mr. Shumway and TBM family who gave their consent to be photographed in ordinary situations and who, no doubt, knew that his work would be published.
To say that the article and photographic images constitutes a "hit piece" is, implies that Mr. Shumway and his TBM family (who clearly have not abandoned him via his apostasy) were complicit in producing a "hit piece" with the intention of painting LDS' and the church in a less than favorable light.
A poster here, "Radex", criticized the photo of the sister presenting a vegan sandwich. Does it occur to anyone here (of course it doesn't) that the woman consented to the photograph because she is *proud* of the role she assumes in taking good care of her husband and children? So what, it's okay for the church to promote the development of homemaking skills but it's not okay to be proud of them?
For those who, in the comments section, referred to the photo series as portraying people who are "from the wrong side of the tracks", "white trash" and/or "under-educated", quite frankly, how dare you for you are not only criticizing Mr. Shumway's photo journal, you are criticizing the children.
If you're so concerned with outward appearances, think about what you appear to be when you criticize photographs of children in every day situations, lazing about on a summer day, taking advantage to "plop" on a mattress in the yard and pose, dress up in crazy clothes, hop about on laundry piles in your parents bedroom or be photographed in your "Sunday best".
Turn that mirror on yourself, folks, and try to figure out what hollow core you are functioning from.
Last edited by Google Feedfetcher on Wed Dec 14, 2011 7:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
As I read the parallel thread on the other board I am struck by the many protests there against the photos and captions as being one sided and not painting a full picture of LDS. How ironic. I guess it is okay to be one sided only as long as you are on the same side.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
