Bigelow's Rameumptom

BYU's New Creative Writing Degree?

2009-07-10T16:23:00.004-06:00

Apparently BYU is gearing up to offer a new master of fine arts (MFA) degree in creative writing. I’m very curious to see how BYU’s MFA is different from its M.A. with creative writing emphasis, which I completed back in 1998.

I really enjoyed my BYU experience, but not so much the actual creative writing track. For one thing, at that time they lumped all kinds of creative writers into one workshop, which made only a little more sense than lumping those learning French, Spanish, and Chinese into one class.

For another, the theory courses were very ambiguous and ethereal and academic and didn’t provide any practical training for a creative writer. The emphasis seemed to be more on preparing me for a Ph.D. program, since the M.A. is not considered a terminal degree. I did like some of my two workshop experiences, but in one the professor never said anything, so it seemed like students teaching students, and in the other I had to complete it by mail with the instructor, as I came down with Hodgkin's disease and had to file an incomplete. My favorite class of the whole degree was the Mormon literature reading class I took from Eugene England.

My BYU M.A. gave me some great things. It turned me on to Mormon literature, the Association for Mormon Letters, etc. which have continued as abiding interests in my life. And it was through the M.A. program that I got an (extremely boring) summer internship in the LDS Church’s curriculum dept. which then directly led to a less-boring full-time stint at the Ensign magazine and a subsequent reasonably well paid career in corporate marketing communications. However, as far as preparing me to become an actual published creative writer, the BYU program did less for me than two years of participating in a good writer’s group and studying books and magazines put out by the likes of Writers Digest would have done.

While I can see benefits to M.A. and MFA programs, I come down on the side of thinking it’s too often all just a big pipe dream for the students. It’s a lot like the multilevel marketing industry in which I work: everyone wants to launch their own successful home-based biz and make money, but fewer than 5% actually make it. If a program in law or dentistry had those job-placement odds, it would fail.

If someone has the time and the money to spend on an MFA without needing to earn a living afterward, I think it's potentially a fair-to-good investment in personal development and could lead to some satisfying literary experiences later, for those who stick with the writing discipline beyond school or luck out with a sustainable teaching job. But for the majority of us who need a real career, I think MFA programs should be much more realistic and should include much more practical emphasis on carving out a workable writing life.

In fact, I tend to think that most creative-writing degrees should be a tag-on minor to some real vocational degree in a discipline with reasonable odds for providing a lifetime remunerative career. For most of us, an MFA is a luxury we can't afford, but I don't think many students realize that until later, when the impossibility of making a living as a creative writer really sinks in.

Here's a very interesting article from a recent New Yorker on this whole topic.

Zarahemla Clearance Sale

2009-07-08T13:39:00.003-06:00

Like nearly all publishers in this economic climate, Zarahemla Books has been hit by returns of unsold books from booksellers.

To help us move excess inventory and raise funds to publish several upcoming new titles, we are currently offering the following titles at heavily discounted prices:

Hooligan - $4.95
Hunting Gideon - $3.95
On the Road to Heaven - $5.95
Long After Dark - $6.95

Shipping is only $2.95 for orders totaling under $25.00 and FREE for orders totaling $25.00 or more.

If you've been procrastinating purchasing these titles, now's obviously the time! It's also a good time to stock up on gifts. Prices will return to normal once inventory catches up.

To take advantage of this sale, visit the Zarahemla Books website, where you can order with secure PayPal payment processing:
http://www.zarahemlabooks.com/main.sc

15 Books I've Read that Will Always Stick with Me

2009-05-18T14:33:00.000-06:00

1. The Hobbit, J.R.R. Tolkien
2. Huckleberry Finn, Mark Twain
3. Couples, John Updike
4. Vanity Fair, William Makepeace Thackeray
5. Moby Dick, Herman Melville
6. The Crimson Petal and the White, Michel Faber
7. Bleak House, Charles Dickens
8. Saturday, Ian McEwan
9. Middlemarch, George Eliot
10. The Corrections, Jonathan Franzen
11. How We Die, Sherwin Nuland
12. The Stand, Stephen King
13. Oryx and Crake, Margaret Atwood
14. The Autobiography of Parley P. Pratt
15. The Beatles: The Biography by Bob Spitz

And you?

Going Underground on Gay Marriage?

2009-04-23T16:49:00.003-06:00

As a Kool-Aid-swilling Mormon, my big question on the whole gay marriage issue is, What is the LDS Church's next move?

I used to think the church should keep fighting in the public arena on this issue. But now I'm thinking it would buy us more peaceful years in society if we went mostly dark on the issue—not refute our beliefs, but circle the wagons, reaffirm what we believe to each other and our children and whatever sincere seekers come our way, and let society do what it will without much further input from us.

I think winning Prop 8 actually backfired because it galvanized the gay movement. Gay marriage is definitely coming, one way or another, probably on the federal level. But Prop 8 was an important opportunity for the LDS Church to make it clear to all Mormons everywhere that the gay lifestyle isn't going to be accepted by the church, despite all the wishful thinking that goes on within liberal Mormon circles. The message is clearer than ever: If you want to be in the church, you need to work on resisting and overcoming your same-sex weakness, not seek justification through so-called marriage. And this message is especially important for our children, who will grow up in a world where the gay lifestyle is promoted and celebrated far more than it is today. God help any of our kids who feel same-sex attraction, because it's going to be damn hard to survive spiritually in tomorrow's radically pro-gay moral climate.

Obviously Mormons will continue to reaffirm the sanctity of godlike marriage within our own group, but I don't see the point in raising much more stink about it in general society, which is pretty much equivalent to the great and spacious building nowadays anyway. It's not worth all the bad publicity and ill will to fight something that's going to happen anyway. We've gone on record with Prop 8, we're now widely known to oppose gay marriage, and I think we should just wash our hands of it and sit back and watch with dismay as society does what it will. To do otherwise seems as unwise to me as pasting targets on our foreheads and butts.

Even if we go mostly underground about this issue, though, I still think society will eventually become so culturally fascist about gay marriage—so politically correct in a twisted, diabolical way—that society will eventually dig us out of our burrows, and of course we'll have to hold our ground at that point, come what may. But clamming up until then will hopefully buy us more time.

The only exception I can think of is that the church should probably help block gay marriage at the Utah level, because we can't just roll over and play dead right here in our own backyard. However, even if Utah votes against gay marriage, it will still eventually gain federal acceptance, and then Utah won't really have a choice, at least while the union still stands.

At some point down the road closer to the Second Coming, when our society is really falling apart due to the majority's departure from God, I'm sure we Mormons will be able to say, "Told you so." Your thoughts?

Why I'm Against Gay Marriage

2009-04-06T22:02:00.005-06:00

Okay, I got myself involved in another blog smackdown on the gay marriage issue. I think I did a better job representing my position this time; below are all my comments, and you can click here if you want to go to the original post on Mormon Feminist Housewives and read them all in context. While I'm not following that blog anymore (for reasons you'll see below), I welcome being reasoned with on this blog, if you have any counter-arguments (however, I've been around the block on this issue enough that I've probably already heard them all).

Some interesting logic, but your post shows that you don’t really understand (or accept) Mormon theology. Same-sex marriage is simply absolutely impossible in Mormon theology. Marriage with accompanying sexual relations is a holy, godlike state. As far as we understand, God doesn’t have sex with other male Gods, and neither does Heavenly Mother have it with other female Gods.

To convince someone who really understands and believes in Mormon theology that God would ever say it’s OK for same-gender couples to marry and have sex with each other, you would have to convince us that our heavenly parents could do that too with other same-gender deities. Good luck with that.

++++

#5: With interfaith marriages, the status of the non-Mormon partner can change in this life or the next, with regards to accepting the Mormon gospel. However, gender is eternal, so there’s no way to transform same-gender couples into godlike couples. Sorry!

#6: Absolutely not satirical. Just voicing the Mormon side, putting out the challenge for someone to harmonize same-gender marriage with Mormon theology. I think it’s impossible, but I’m all ears.

++++

#13: OK, I’ll tell you my logic. (I know sources exist outside of the four standard works in which GAs have spoken of similar things, but I don’t have them handy. Some of it was McConkie, which may not hold much credibility anymore anyway.)

We’re taught that God has a corporeal body with “parts and passions.” We’re also taught that we’re created in God’s image and that gender is eternal. So, basically, our heavenly parents must have actual genitals. Personally, I cannot conceive of a God who has a humanoid body and who possesses male gender who is just blank and smooth between his legs, like a Ken doll. (And similar reasoning applies for our female deity.)

And if God has a reproductive organ, I can’t imagine he doesn’t use it in some celestial way, and same with his spouse(s). I don’t pretend for a moment to understand exactly how celestial procreation works, but my Mormon logic tells me that it is a glorified, ultra-turbocharged version of our mortal version here on earth. (By the way, I personally tend to agree with one GA who gave his opinion that those resurrected to a lesser degree will not receive their genitals in the resurrection–indeed, perhaps they WILL be like Ken and Barbie dolls in the crotch area.)

This is deep stuff, and today’s GAs won’t touch it with a ten-foot pole, but it’s essential to the conversation about same-gender “marriage” and why it will never be compatible with Mormon theology, in my opinion.

++++

#11 said: “Why in a pluralistic,civil society does Mormon theology take precedence over equality for all?”

If I understand Mormonism correctly, we believe that God inspired America’s founding on Judeo-Christian principles chiefly as a seedbed for the restoration of the gospel. If this society devolves from this original purpose and nature, then it is cause for great alarm and strong action. Legitimizing sodomy in any form is against basic Judeo-Christian principles, not just against Mormon ones. Now, the libertarian in me personally agrees that we shouldn’t be prosecuting people for committing sodomy or anything, but to change the definition of marriage to fully accommodate sodomy is just WAY over the top.

From a Mormon standpoint, I agree with us taking any steps possible to help slow our host society’s devolution into post-Judeo-Christian secularism, because otherwise we know that the same thing will happen to our civilization that happened to the Book of Mormon civilizations. In fact, we know it WILL eventually happen in the time leading up to the Second Coming, but it’s worth fighting to delay the inevitable by a few decades. Also, standing up for what’s right helps sort out the god-fearing from the post-god people, a process that will only keep accelerating as we progress ever deeper into these latter-latter days.

This whole gay-marriage issue is both a sign of our civilization’s degree of pulling away from God and an unprecedented opportunity for people to choose which side they’re on. I’m sure thousands of people are weeding themselves right out of Mormonism because they’ve been deceived by the modern-day gay movement. In my belief and that of most Mormons like me, same-gender attraction is a mortal failing to be resisted or dealt with like any other addictive tendency that may be beyond some individuals’ control, with compassion that stops well short of actually condoning sinful behavior or, even worse, presuming to change eternal principles to legitimize the sin.

++++

#44: That’s all fine and good, and obviously you know history better than I do and how to discuss it. My statement wasn’t a sweeping statement precluding any other influences on this country’s founding as well, and I also wasn’t using the term “Judeo-Christian principles” to mean the whole package transported over from Europe or something. I was more meaning biblical morality and the bits and pieces of the Judeo-Christian tradition or mindset that God saw fit to salvage from among the errors of history and put into the hearts and minds of America’s founders, many of whom asked for such inspiration, after all.

++++

Eh, you guys don’t scare me. I’ll continue to browse FHM any time I want and comment any time I want, unless you ban me.

I guess lots of people see blogs like this as havens from things in Mormonism they don’t like, rather than as places to really fully consider all viewpoints, including conservative Mormon ones like mine is on these issues.

I’m sure there are at least a handful of readers out there who relate with and appreciate most of what I’m saying, even if they don’t speak up because they don’t have much stomach for the demeaning flak that ensues. Get used to it, folks, because it’s only going to get worse, and it’s eventually going to reach YOU too, one way or another, as society puts more and more pressure on us to deny our beliefs. It’s too bad when it comes from ostensibly within the faith…

++++

Like I said before, Quimb-o, I’m open to people using logic and evidence to help me examine my beliefs, which I admit have been hard-fought and hard-won and are not something I’ll put aside easily, and which I tend to communicate as certainties because that’s how I experience them at this point in my life.

That’s why I occasionally get involved in discussions on this issue, to allow for the chance that someone might be able to explain some bit of theology or spiritual reasoning that might make it possible to give up my views against gay marriage and go along with the secular/liberal crowd. But so far no one has been able to do that; instead, I get lots of logical fallacies and emotional stuff. (And I’m not claiming that I don’t return in kind, sometimes.)

Also, I’m very interested in learning more about how others think, and it’s breathtaking to me to see the audacity of people within Mormonism on this issue. Really, it’s VERY entertaining to me and thought-provoking too, mostly in a cautionary way.

Bottom line: I think it’s a discussion worth having and am glad it’s online rather than in person. Quimby, I don’t really care if you’re on my side either, but I have an almost voyeuristic interest in how people with views like yours justify yourself and–again–just a TINY bit of curiosity to see if anyone can win me over to the other side.

++++

OK, I’m back from having Indian food with the editors of Sunstone and Dialogue, both in town for a conference today, and I wanted to weigh in on a few more things before I watch some Big Love on DVD:

#33: I agree that the idea of no genitals in the lower kingdoms is wonderfully hilarious, while also being something that I can believe. I admit I got the concept out of one of the Tanners’ anti-Mormon books, but they’re usually quite scrupulous about their quotes, if quick to go for the weirdest stuff in places like the Journal of Discourses. I just went down in the basement and tried to find it, but couldn’t. I like testing out my Mormon mind against people like the Tanners from time to time, and I’ve learned a lot about my own religion from them. I also get a real kick out of The Godmakers.

Mfranti, I have somewhat more to say unto thee. I think you were too quick to take my crack about Mormon Kool-Aid too personally. I don’t have a clue about your background or anything, so I was responding solely to the person who made the outraged comment in #41. Judging solely by that comment, the person writing the comment has not encountered or absorbed much deep Mormon thought yet, at least in some areas. I can’t reconstruct for you exactly how my Mormon worldview came about, but it goes far beyond the scriptures and includes countless other Mormon books and articles, as well as countless seminary and institute classes, firesides, and employee meetings and retreats while I was an editor at the Ensign magazine for over six years, at which high-ranking church officials, apostles, and other GAs would share frank, intimate insights into the Church, the latter days, America, the gay movement, etc. So you see, I’ve drunk very deeply of Mormon Kool-Aid, and anyone else who has drunk as deeply would recognize what I say as very much reflective of fairly widespread currents of Mormon thought, not freak out and attempt to apologize for them like the writer of comment #41 did, whoever she may be.

Oh, and as far as the “gay movement,” here’s a starting place for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_rights_movement

Personally, I feel no doubt that Satan has largely inspired the gay movement to legitimize sodomy-based relationships as a valid lifestyle. And this must make it incredibly hard for today’s people who are same-sex attracted, to have this large, well-organized campaign luring them all the time by making gayness look normal and acceptable. A hundred years ago, people who felt same-sex attraction might in rare cases act on it furtively but would never have tried to publicly embrace it and defend it as a legitimate long-term lifestyle. But now someone who feels SSA and doesn’t act upon it is made to feel like a repressed coward, so no wonder we have people feeling such pressure to “come out.” With such a vibrant, alluring gay lifestyle beckoning, many people with mixed gender attraction are giving in to same-gender attractions who never would have done so if society had not become so permissive, a process aided and abetted by the devil, who I believe is a real being with a real agenda and real ways of confusing and tempting us.

#56: Huh? I’m actually against sodomy laws. I think consenting adults should be free to practice whatever vices they want and face the consequences, as long as they don’t directly infringe on the rights of others. Even the church hasn’t said anything about enforcing sodomy laws, and it even stated that it doesn’t necessarily oppose basic legal rights for gay couples. Committing blasphemy against God by changing the definition of holy matrimony to include sodomy is a whole other ballgame, though.

#64: That’s a really interesting viewpoint with some good logic. However, Joseph Smith and other early leaders made it quite clear, and it makes total logical sense to me, that God is part of an eternal lineage of Gods who all follow and obey and uphold the same eternal principles, which are very clear when it comes to marriage and procreation and parentage. The universe is one big endless Zion beehive of Gods who are all on the same program, not a chaotic sci-fi scenario like you speculate with “creative families.” At least, from my Mormon perspective.

#68: In logic class, we call this an ad hominim attack. If I do have any narcissistic tendencies, I have lots of other easier topics and more welcoming venues to feed that need. I admit I do feel a sense of responsibility to speak out on this issue as a conservative Mormon when I feel so inclined, because so few other people who think like me do so in venues that I find interesting, such as this one. It’s boring to talk about this with people who already think just like I do.

#71: Thank you. This is just the kind of Mormon Kool-Aid that I’m talking about, which people like the writer of comment #41 don’t seem to have internalized much yet.

#73: Oh, I just like conversations like this online because I have time to formulate my responses and can space it out over a longer time period rather than getting caught in some intense face-to-face encounter. In face-to-face debate, I’m the kind of person who tends to do more listening than talking, with lots of head nodding because I can always see what the other person is saying, but online I can focus on what I think and formulate my responses. I’m sure this is true for other people who are text-driven rather than verbal-driven.

#82 said “There are so many Christian and Jewish sects that are totally fine with gay marriage (either secular or religious) so why should this church, or a group of conservative churches, have the say?” That doesn’t mean anything to me, because none of those churches has the full truth or is authorized by God or led by his priesthood. I’m sure we’ll see the day when the Mormon church is the only one left standing in the right place, all other churches having caved in to secular societal pressure and persecution. (This is another concept I learned at the foot of a mentor while employed at the church.)

#83: Yes, I’m sure he’ll be patient for you to hopefully eventually come around and fully understand Mormon theological reality and accept the stand of the prophets. And if you don’t, he won’t be able to fully trust you and reward you, but he’ll still love you and give you as much reward as he can justify and as you can handle. And if you have some real mental or spiritual block that makes you not fully accountable in this area, then I know he’ll take that into account too, but it won’t make him change the doctrine.

#85: Whoa, the church isn’t trying to force anything on anybody, just trying to rally the majority to block the wrong-headed efforts of the minority to change basic laws and principles upon which the nation was founded. Everyone already agrees that greed, materialism, and poverty are not good, so the church doesn’t need to state the obvious; the reason the homosexual issue is such a telling one is that it’s a recent development in which you now have people saying that the sinful vice of sodomy is actually a good, acceptable thing. That kind of twisting of God’s laws shows an amazing lack of sensitivity to his spirit and respect for his laws, and the more this kind of secular, proudly humanistic thinking catches on in our civilization, the faster God will naturally withdraw his blessing from among us, eventually leaving us to the fate of the Jaredites and the Nephites.

I think one of the most effective ways that Satan is confusing people is to conflate the gay issue with the racial issue and, yes, perhaps even the feminist issue. Race and gender are unchangeable, unavoidable characteristics, while sexual preference is something that one can choose to act upon or not. And I want to say that I’m personally much more alarmed by a supposedly Mormon heterosexual who is so confused by the world that he or she thinks gay marriage is a good idea than I am by a gay person who is having sinful sex but acknowledges that it’s not the ideal and that he is breaking God’s laws but just hasn’t yet figured out a way to resist the temptation. And yes, I do have some gay friends who have left the church.

++++

#142: Hmm, good point. I’m sure I’ve heard someone else argue this better and haven’t restated it as well. I don’t think homosexuality is a characteristic; I think it’s a temptation that can be so strong in some cases that it may FEEL like a characteristic, especially when gay propaganda abets such a feeling. But this gets into areas of whether there’s a biological component to it, which is unproven in either direction. Bottom line: It’s certainly not a clear-cut case like race or gender. Personally, I believe it’s analogous to alcoholism; some people are more prone to it than others and some seem almost born to be taken into its clutches against their will, but it’s something that ideally should be resisted and that should not be enthroned or celebrated by society as something good for us.

#143: Huh, not sure what to say. Are you saying it was wrong for me to comment on your comment from a certain not uncommon Mormon perspective? If so, I think you’re overreacting a bit. I agree with you that God won’t condemn you for doing your best and will give you all the opportunity you need to work it out, and maybe someday someone will finally pull the rug out from under me on this issue and I’ll be in the same boat as you, at odds with the church but feeling that God fully accepts my differing opinion.

I remembered a scripture that encapsulates why I think the LDS Church did the right thing on Prop 8 and should keep trying to rally the people of America along these lines:

26 Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people.
27 And if the time comes that the voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land. (Mosiah 29)

I think when this will really get interesting is when gay marriage makes it to the federal level within a few more years or decades.

++++

#174: Bah, no regrets on this end. The reason I brought up my Mormon background is because Mfranti commented as if I were some kind of oddball embarrassment for which she felt the need to apologize, when in reality I’m well seasoned to communicate ideas that come from deep within the church (not without my own idiosyncrasies added in, I admit; and I certainly wouldn’t claim to be free of ego, either; it’s hard to be any kind of effective writer/communicator without some healthy self-confidence).

The main reason I like to let loose in this discussion from time to time in somewhat hostile venues like this is because I suspect that for every person who is vocal about their pro-gay-marriage stand and about their disdain for the Church’s involvement in the issue, there are one or more silent readers of comments who are still trying to figure out where they stand on the issue, and I hate to sit by and not try to communicate the orthodox Mormon side, for those still weighing the evidence.

Personal disparagement like what you just said about me, calling me a judgmental ass, just comes with the territory, that tired old ad-hominem cop out often resorted to when other rhetorical devices aren’t strong enough to effectively counter the orthodox position. I don’t expect that my position will convince anyone who’s actively debating the anti-Church side; it’s the undecided onlookers I’m hoping to influence. Don’t be persuaded by so-called Mormons who go counter to the prophet, even if they claim to have received their own revelation from God!

++++

#167: Ah, the old “the same thing is going to happen with the gay issue as happened with the black issue” argument. “Boy, won’t you prophet-following sheep all feel dumb when the church eventually sees the light and accepts gay marriage.”

Here’s why I think it’s different this time, and I’m open to correction if I get any history or interpretation wrong: With the black race issue, it seems like individual GAs gave their opinions for reasons why the church didn’t give the priesthood to blacks, but I don’t think the church ever had an official unified position that rose to the level of today’s practically scriptural proclamation on the family.

And the Church, to my knowledge, never openly resisted the civil rights movement in any organized way, although I understand that some individual GAs expressed concern about some of the militant aspects of the civil rights movement.

However, the Church leadership is obviously quite intensely unified about resisting the gay rights movement, at least at the marriage level. We have the proclamation, and we have organized campaigns and efforts against gay-rights efforts. That signals a whole different ball game. The church ain’t going to back off from this one; there’s too much solid doctrine and theology behind it, not the sketchy mark-of-Cain stuff used by individuals here and there to justify the racial ban.

With the racial issue, our society moved in a positive, godly direction and the church eventually came around. I agree it’s disappointing that the church didn’t lead out in this area and took so long to change its racist policy. With the gay issue, though, society is moving in the direction of ungodly, permissive, radical change that the church cannot abide or capitulate to. Some people may indeed be
individually unaccountable for their homosexual orientation, and we’ve got to find better ways to help them deal with this challenge, but legitimizing the sin of sodomy with marriage status ain’t the way.

++++

Quimby, I don’t understand you. While “ass” is a pejorative remark based on subjective standards, if someone is pro gay marriage when the prophet is anti gay marriage, isn’t it just a cold, hard fact that the person is “counter to the prophet” on that issue?

++++

#194 wrote: “The American Public sector forced a re-evaluation of LDS doctrine on several occasions, and perhaps that is exactly what Heavenly Father intended by locating the church in American borders.”

Yes, agreed. In my opinion, however, it works the other way around too, and the LDS Church is now called upon by God to try to help persuade the American public from going down the wrong moral path by putting sodomite relationships on an equal footing with procreative hetero relationships.

++++

#196: I’d like to see if I can respond to some of this well-written comment.

And with all due respect, I find your position full of folk doctrine and speculation at best.

I wouldn’t deny that there’s some of that in my beliefs, but are you calling the proclamation on the family folk doctrine?

The uniquely LDS scriptures say not one word about homosexuality. […] Having never canonized anything about this issue since the Restoration, and with the founding prophet Joseph Smith saying nothing about it either, this means all statements by the Church about homosexuality rest on a Biblical basis which is questionable at best.

I don’t really have a direct refutation for this, especially for the biblical stuff, but here’s my thought: It may be that the reason homosexuality isn’t dealt with in LDS scripture is because it wasn’t even an issue, it wasn’t even on the radar, it wasn’t even within the realm of possibility that society could devolve to the point where same-sex marriage could actually become a serious proposal on the table. (After all, we’re often reminded that most all of Joseph Smith’s revelations came in response to the Church’s needs and requests.)

I’m sure someone can cite some obscure society somewhere that performed something like gay marriages, but unless someone can convince me otherwise, I would say that our civilization is the first major civilization that actually has the nerve to say the same-sex marriage is a good idea and deserves equal status with traditional hetero marriage. I know that same-sex attraction has always been with us, and I know that people like the Greeks indulged it to an alarming degree, but most of those men were still heterosexually married and, as far as I know, no one tried to say that a same-sex relationship was a suitable alternative. I mean, they wanted to have progeny, after all. Today, of course, we’re a lot less excited about having progeny, and procreative science has muddied the waters further.

Here’s the thing with me: I don’t judge individual gays. I fully believe there are some gay people who really don’t have any choice about their attraction (at the same time, I believe some “gay” people have chosen to magnify their same-sex attractions and minimize their hetero ones). I think it’s even possible that some gay people who have chosen to live a life of fidelity with a same-sex romantic partner may actually be forgiven fairly readily at some point for the sinful sodomy aspect of it; only God knows each person’s degree of accountability and whether they made the best of their circumstances, and the Atonement can fix everything that’s out of whack, for those who let it. (I absolutely do not believe, however, that these couples could ever be sealed as eternal sexual partners, although perhaps their relationship could continue on some basis through the eternities. I’ve heard arguments that same-sex partners could be sealed, but it comes across to me as pure science fiction.)

My problem is with giving gay marriage equal footing with hetero marriage. I’ve already talked about the theological reasons why I object to that. I’ve also talked about why I’m alarmed by the idea of the majority of people preferring this to what we’ve been taught by prophets of God. Another thing I’m concerned about is the confusion it causes for young people. Many young people experiment sexually before settling on their sexual identity. If the gay option becomes so widely accepted and legitimized, many more young people will lock into that lifestyle than otherwise would have. Yes, there will always be some who are just 100% gay through and through regardless of societal influences. But there are many—perhaps the majority—who could resist gay impulses and capitalize on their hetero impulses, but society’s acceptance of the gay side makes it much harder to do so. Bottom line, I don’t want my kids growing up in a world that offers such confusion about marriage.

Here’s another reason I’m against gay marriage from a Mormon standpoint: In our temples, we perform sealings for all married couples. At some point if it hasn’t happened already, some of these gay marriages are going to creep into our family history databases and get sealed, if the fact that they’re same-sex can’t be spotted. For those who believe in Mormon theology, this is a huge inadvertent desecration of the ordinance.

Nothing in your arguments, CB, necessarily excludes the possibility of same sex relationships in the eternities. The best you can defensibly say is that our knowledge is incomplete. If you truly believe the 9th Article of Faith then you must concede this.

Yeah, you’re right, I can’t prove it. But I think the bigger burden is on those who are trying to introduce this new idea, not those who are trying to defend the status quo.

A generation ago it was proclaiming as a matter of doctrine and faith that homosexuality was a choice. Now it’s flipped on that. So when was/is the Church
wrong?

I don’t think the Church has so much flipped as they have refined and clarified their verbiage. They acknowledge that unwanted homosexual feelings are not a choice, but they continue to maintain that acting on those feelings is a choice.

Now the Church is conceding that this “core characteristic” may not change for some in this life. In which case, what afterward? The Church has no answers.

Incorrect. Through the Atonement and resurrection, all earthly flaws can be corrected, including same-sex attraction, even for gay people who can’t currently imagine what it will be like to have hetero desires.

The best you can say CB is that based on your limited knowledge at present, you and the Church believe XYZ, and you must acknowledge that it is all subject to change.

Anything’s possible! But it’s also possible to hope for change for the wrong reasons, such as extreme compassion for gays and/or the desire to be politically correct in today’s society. Both of these motives have redeeming qualities, but not when they outweigh understanding and adhering to the bounds the Lord has set. Any Mormon who is not following the prophet’s lead on this issue is taking a real gamble; I acknowledge that the gamble paid off for those who rejected the Church’s racist policies prior to 1978, but I just don’t see it paying off this time, and I really worry about you Mormon folks who are pro-gay marriage. I worry more about you than I worry about an actively gay person who acknowledges that his lifestyle is in error.

++++

Go ahead and ban me on principle then, Quimby. If I can’t state how I feel from a Mormon perspective when talking about things with other Mormons who are on dangerous ground by preaching against the prophet, then I’d like to request my name to be removed from your records.

I’ve been spending too much time on this anyway. It will be the second blog I’ve been banned from, including Mormon Matters.

Things I've Done in My Lifetime

2009-04-02T22:23:00.002-06:00

X = I've done it
O = I haven't

(X) Gone on a blind date - that's how I met my wife Ann
(X) Skipped school - a fair bit during my senior year, especially seminary
(O) Watched someone die - never seen someone actually pass away
(X) Been to Canada - Alberta when I was young; Montreal and Toronto (twice) as an adult
(X) Been to Mexico - just Tiajuana; I'd love to visit Mexico City and southward
(X) Been to Florida - just Orlando a couple of times for conventions
(X) Been to Hawaii - one time, Oahu
(O) Been on a helicopter - I'm not particularly interested
(X) Gone to Washington, DC - yeah, maybe 5-6 times; not my favorite
(X) Swam in the ocean - Pacific and Indian (Perth, Australia); I've been to Atlantic but may not have actually swum, due to cold
(X) Cried yourself to sleep - I'm sure I did as a kid
(O) Sang karaoke - I don't drink alcohol, so what's the point?
(X) Paid for a meal with coins only - I'm sure I did in high school or college
(O) Been to the top of the St. Louis Arch - just drove by it
(X) Done something you told yourself you wouldn't - duh
(X) Made prank phone calls - yeah, did a lot of those at one point in junior high
(X) Been down Bourbon Street in New Orleans - with my wife
(X) Laughed until some kind of beverage came out of your nose & elsewhere
(X) Caught a snowflake on your tongue
(O) Been deep-sea fishing - I may very well like to try it, with a good guide
(X) Driven across the United States
(O) Been in a hot air balloon - would like to try sometime
(O) Been sky diving - absolutely no interest
(X) Gone snowmobiling - once as a boy scout; would like to go again
(X) Lived in more than one country - Australia for my mission; would LOVE to again somewhere
(X) Enjoyed the beauty of Old Faithful Geyser - yep, and going again this summer
(X) Seen the Statue of Liberty - I've even climbed up into her head (took longer than it was worth)
(X) Gone to the top of Seattle Space Needle - I'd like to spend more time in Seattle
(O) Been on a cruise - part of me wants to try, but part worries it would be boring at times
(X) Traveled by train - the farthest is probably Boston to New York City
(O) Traveled by motorcycle - no, just a little local riding
(X) Been horseback riding - just hour-long trail rides at resorts
(X) Ridden on a San Francisco cable car
(X) Truly believe in the power of prayer - I was miraculously healed of cancer
(O) Been in a rain forest - not sure exactly what the definition of one is
(X) Seen whales in the ocean
(X) Been to Niagara Falls
(O) Ridden on an elephant - I would love to visit India someday
(O) Swam with dolphins - sounds a little corny to me, but I'd probably try it
(X) Been to the Olympics - one hockey match here in Provo, seat so uncomfortable I waited outside in the lobby
(O) Walked on the Great Wall of China - plan to this June
(O) Saw and heard a glacier calf - not a big priority
(O) Been spinnaker flying - I don't even know what this is
(X) Been waterskiing - several times in high school, no interest now (I hate cold water and exertion requiring any skill)
(X) Been snowskiing - quite a bit in high school, don't mind going with kids every once in a while
(X) Been to Westminster Abbey - yes, last April I attended a fascinating evensong service there
(X) Been to the Louvre - yes, last April, cool building but I like the contents of British museums better
(O) Swam in the Mediterranean - maybe this September, if my work sends me on a trip there (50/50 chance)
(X) Been to a Major League Baseball game - several Dodger games as a kid in L.A.; no interest now
(O) Been to a National Football League game - I would be willing to try one

So far in 2009 have I . . . ?

2009-03-28T23:08:00.005-06:00

Sorry, it's been a while, and this questionnaire I pulled off Facebook is kind of lame...

1) kissed someone? Of course, my wife, every day.

2) been dumped? Nope, I'm still married and employed. I think a few people have unfriended me on Facebook, though. Can't imagine why...

3) been drunk? No. I sometimes wonder if I could actually handle moderate alcohol usage in my life right now or if the Mormon church is right that none of us should enjoy any of it, ever.

4) stayed out/up all night? Not on purpose, but I've lost a few nights to insomnia, due mainly to indigestion from eating too much too late. But I still slept at least a few hours.

5) ate so much you got sick? See number four above. The older I get, the less well my digestive system works, though I continue to eat mostly what I want.

6) cried? Oh, my eyes have welled up quite a few times, usually more feelings of excitement than sadness.

7) gone to a funeral? Not that I remember.

9) watched something/someone die? Yes, I witnessed my furnace dying. It was more hearing it than seeing it, though. Oh, and our dishwasher and computer printer. Fortunately I haven't witnessed any biological death, that I can remember.

10) left home without permission? I guess this list is geared toward younger people?

11) smoked? No. Sometimes I enjoy sneaking some second-hand smoke, but I'm never around that anymore, what with all the new laws and stuff.

12) got in a fight? Maybe some verbal sparring with my ex-wife.

13) made someone cry? Not that I know of, but I wouldn't be surprised if I did.

14) found out who your friends are? Just here on Facebook, if you judge by who invited me and who accepted my invitations. I was offended today because I got a Facebook e-mail saying that a woman I used to work with at the Ensign magazine had accepted my invitation this morning, but when I clicked on her profile she was no longer my friend, suggesting to me that she clicked on my profile and considered me unworthy to keep. I sent her a message that said, "Well, at least the Lord still loves me."

15) been told you were hot by a complete stranger? Yeah, people stop me on the street all the time and tell me that--not.

16) left the state? Not so far this year, but I have plans to do so later this year as many as four times, if they all work out, including possibly two international trips.

17) been kicked out? My boss may have kicked me out of a meeting if I started dozing or getting too smart alecky.

18) been arrested? No.

19) had your heart broken? No.

20) Told someone (outside the family) you love them? Not that I remember. If so, I was using the term casually.

21) fell asleep with the opposite sex in a bed? Every night with my wife. (Yeah, I do think this list is for high school and college ages.)

23) had someone tell you they hate you? Sometimes my kids say that when they're mad, especially our little drama king Austin.

24) been in a wreck or wrecked a car? No, thank goodness. I worry about it a little every day.

25) cried for no reason? No.

26) felt like dying? I certainly wouldn't go that far, but I'm the kind of person who occasionally thinks I wouldn't be all that disappointed if I DID happen to die. Usually I don't feel that way, though.

27) felt like killing someone else? Not for real, although I can think of some people who I certainly wouldn't be disappointed if they died.

28) wished you were someone/somewhere else? Very often, multiple times per day, as far as my career goes and often with regard to not liking living in Utah.

29) missed someone so much it hurt? No.

30) lost someone close but not through death? No. Oh, wait, I did let the little boys wander away from our house one afternoon when I was supposed to be watching them, so I jumped in the car and luckily found them at the bottom of the street.

31) wanted to ask someone something but couldn't? I tend to avoid confrontations and difficult discussions, so probably.

32) lied to your parents? No.

33) lied to anyone? Probably some little social fibs, nothing I can remember. I was totally honest on our taxes, to our great financial pain.

34) bought something for someone other than yourself? I buy things that my wife and kids ask me to, but I don't initiate giving gifts. I hate giving gifts! Not the expense but the pain of picking out something for them.

35) argued over the petty things in life? "Argue" is a strong word, but I tend to nag my wife a little more than she does me, mostly about household cleanliness.

36) wanted to tell someone something but never did? Probably.

37) learned a lesson the hard way? No doubt, but can't remember a specific example right now.

38) trusted someone you shouldnt have? Probably.

39) done something you shouldn't have? If I were as pure and spiritual and religious and healthy as I should be, there are many things I probably should not read, listen to, watch, eat, and drink.

40) laughed so hard you cried? Yeah, a couple of times, at least got tears in my eyes.

41) danced under the stars? Give me a break. I don't dance, and I don't linger under the stars, at least not this time of year.

42) had a pillow fight? Maybe a brief one with some of my boys. I don't like that kind of horseplay much.

43) kissed somone but regretted it? No, except maybe my wife if she had a cold.

44) met someone new? Yeah, lots of new students in my night class.

45) became friends with someone you never thought you would? Hmm, can't think of any.

46) wished on a shooting star? No. Another dumb question.

47) wanted to go back in time and change something you did/said? Sure, but can't remember what. Well, a few weeks ago I cut my thumb.

48) gone to church? Yeah, I've actually been better about attending church this year, because the time changed from 9:00 to 11:00 and Zachary stopped taking naps, which was a good excuse to stay home lots of weeks last year. I don't like attending much, though, and wish I could get away with going only once a month.

49) cried yourself to sleep? No.

50) loved someone so much it hurt? Huh? I worry about family members from time to time, but I don't really get what this question means.

The BBC's Book List

2009-03-02T21:27:00.002-07:00

The BBC believes most people will have only read 6 of the 100 books here. I bolded every one I've read, plus added comments here and there:

1 Pride and Prejudice - Jane Austen (really enjoyed it, have read many other Austens)
2 The Lord of the Rings - JRR Tolkien (love the idea of it, but it bogs down in places and I don't think I ever actually finished the last book)
3 Jane Eyre - Charlotte Bronte (quite likable, but not quite as charming as Austen)
4 Harry Potter series - JK Rowling (actually just the first three volumes so far, but I intend to eventually read the rest, especially if one of my sons wants me to read them aloud)
5 To Kill a Mockingbird - Harper Lee (great, but perhaps a touch overrated?)
6 The Bible (read a lot of New Testament straight through on my mission, but otherwise just pieces here and there)
7 Wuthering Heights - Emily Bronte (started it, strongly disliked it)
8 Nineteen Eighty Four - George Orwell (I don't remember actually ever reading it; I read fewer than a third of the novels assigned in high school)
9 His Dark Materials - Philip Pullman
10 Great Expectations - Charles Dickens (haven't read it yet but am committed to reading more Dickens in my lifetime)
11 Little Women - Louisa M Alcott
12 Tess of the D'Urbervilles - Thomas Hardy
13 Catch 22 - Joseph Heller (started it, didn't like it enough to continue)
14 Complete Works of Shakespeare (I've read only a handful of plays, not a big fan)
15 Rebecca - Daphne Du Maurier
16 The Hobbit - JRR Tolkien (probably my single favorite book ever, seriously)
17 Birdsong - Sebastian Faulk
18 Catcher in the Rye - J.D. Salinger (what's all the fuss about?)
19 The Time Traveller's Wife - Audrey Niffenegger
20 Middlemarch - George Eliot (fantastic book, in my top 10 for sure)
21 Gone With The Wind - Margaret Mitchell
22 The Great Gatsby - F Scott Fitzgerald (way overrated, kind of boring)
23 Bleak House - Charles Dickens (I happen to be reading this one right now)
24 War and Peace - Leo Tolstoy (enjoyed the first section, but then bogged down and quit)
25 The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams (not the book, but loved the radio show and hated the movie)
26 Brideshead Revisited - Evelyn Waugh (quite liked it)
27 Crime and Punishment - Fyodor Dostoyevsky (liked the portion I read, but didn't even get halfway)
28 Grapes of Wrath - John Steinbeck (loved it in high school)
29 Alice in Wonderland - Lewis Carroll
30 The Wind in the Willows - Kenneth Grahame
31 Anna Karenina - Leo Tolstoy
32 David Copperfield - Charles Dickens (wow, this one really turned me on to Dickens, and relatively recently too)
33 Chronicles of Narnia - CS Lewis (enjoyed the first one but thought they got progressively boring, not sure how far into the series I made it)
34 Emma - Jane Austen
35 Persuasion - Jane Austen
36 The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe - CS Lewis (this one really appealed to my imagination)
37 The Kite Runner - Khaled Hosseini
38 Captain Corelli's Mandolin - Louis De Bernieres
39 Memoirs of a Geisha - Arthur Golden (enjoyed it quite a bit)
40 Winnie the Pooh - AA Milne (I suppose Disney doesn't count?)
41 Animal Farm - George Orwell (seems like I read at least part)
42 The Da Vinci Code - Dan Brown (made the time pass fast on the treadmill)
43 One Hundred Years of Solitude - Gabriel Garcia Marquez (in some ways kind of flat and distant but in other ways quite interesting and certainly unpredictable)
44 A Prayer for Owen Meaney - John Irving (went on way too long, but I did finish it; it sort of put me off Irving)
45 The Woman in White - Wilkie Collins
46 Anne of Green Gables - LM Montgomery
47 Far From The Madding Crowd - Thomas Hardy
48 The Handmaid's Tale - Margaret Atwood (I've enjoyed quite a few Atwood novels, but this one doesn't make my top three of hers)
49 Lord of the Flies - William Golding (I'd like to reread this one)
50 Atonement - Ian McEwan (I'm actually a much bigger fan of his book Saturday)
51 Life of Pi - Yann Martel (quite a narrative experience!)
52 Dune - Frank Herbert (while I'm well read in fantasy, I'm quite weak on sci-fi)
53 Cold Comfort Farm - Stella Gibbons
54 Sense and Sensibility - Jane Austen (not sure what Austen is my favorite; I'd like to reread them all)
55 A Suitable Boy - Vikram Seth
56 The Shadow of the Wind - Carlos Ruiz Zafon
57 A Tale Of Two Cities - Charles Dickens
58 Brave New World - Aldous Huxley (I read the first few chapters online recently and would like to continue it)
59 The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time - Mark Haddon
60 Love In The Time Of Cholera - Gabriel Garcia Marquez
61 Of Mice and Men - John Steinbeck
62 Lolita - Vladimir Nabokov (wow, quite a stylistic, queasy trip, certainly not the slightest bit boring)
63 The Secret History - Donna Tartt
64 The Lovely Bones - Alice Sebold (eh, not as great as I expected for all the fuss)
65 Count of Monte Cristo - Alexandre Dumas
66 On The Road - Jack Kerouac (this one's on my reading list)
67 Jude the Obscure - Thomas Hardy (I didn't like it well enough to seek out more Hardy)
68 Bridget Jones's Diary - Helen Fielding
69 Midnight's Children - Salman Rushdie
70 Moby Dick - Herman Melville (I loved this one unexpectedly well, probably in my top 10)
71 Oliver Twist - Charles Dickens
72 Dracula - Bram Stoker (seems like I read it, can't be sure)
73 The Secret Garden - Frances Hodgson Burnett (ditto)
74 Notes From A Small Island - Bill Bryson
75 Ulysses - James Joyce (read the first few pages, sold the book quick)
76 The Bell Jar - Sylvia Plath
77 Swallows and Amazons - Arthur Ransome
78 Germinal - Emile Zola
79 Vanity Fair - William Makepeace Thackeray (this one is in my top three ever, I think)
80 Possession - AS Byatt
81 A Christmas Carol - Charles Dickens
82 Cloud Atlas - David Mitchell
83 The Color Purple - Alice Walker
84 The Remains of the Day - Kazuo Ishiguro (loved the movie)
85 Madame Bovary - Gustave Flaubert (loved this one, in my top 10)
86 A Fine Balance - Rohinton Mistry
87 Charlotte's Web - EB White
88 The Five People You Meet In Heaven - Mitch Albom
89 Adventures of Sherlock Holmes - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (read all these within a short period of time as a teen, would like to revisit sometime)
90 The Faraway Tree Collection - Enid Blyton
91 Heart of Darkness - Joseph Conrad (couldn't get into it in high school)
92 The Little Prince - Antoine De Saint-Exupery (really didn't like this at all)
93 The Wasp Factory - Iain Banks
94 Watership Down - Richard Adams (it's on my list to read someday)
95 A Confederacy of Dunces - John Kennedy Toole
96 A Town Like Alice - Nevil Shute
97 The Three Musketeers - Alexandre Dumas
98 Hamlet - William Shakespeare
99 Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - Roald Dahl (I consider myself a big Dahl fan)
100 Les Miserables - Victor Hugo

Total I've read: 39 (more or less)

More Random Things

2009-02-26T20:52:00.000-07:00

WERE YOU NAMED AFTER ANYONE? I share a first name with my father. I don't recommend this. We've had lots of confusion with mail, phone calls, credit reports. For example, when I go to the Jiffy Lube down here in Springville, my dad's info in Bountiful comes up. As for my middle name of Kimball, that's my mom's maiden name.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU CRIED? Hmm, my eyes got a little teary whenI was reading my student papers the other night about drug addiction, abuse, murder, job loss, etc.

DO YOU LIKE YOUR HANDWRITING? It's OK. But like most everyone else, I do precious little handwriting anymore.

WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE LUNCH MEAT? I like tuna at home and smoked turkey at Subway.

DO YOU HAVE KIDS? Oh, yeah. I'm in deep.

IF YOU WERE ANOTHER PERSON, WOULD YOU BE FRIENDS WITH YOU? Yeah, Iwould be attracted to my own irreverence, humor, sarcasm, lightmindedness, smell, etc.

DO YOU STILL HAVE YOUR TONSILS? Yes

WOULD YOU BUNGEE JUMP? No

WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE CEREAL? I hate all forms of cereal, which I consider equivalent to dog kibble with tons of sugar added. About every two years, I will chew my way through a bowl of Captain Crunch, but it always scratches up the roof of my mouth.

DO YOU UNTIE YOUR SHOES WHEN YOU TAKE THEM OFF? No.

WHAT IS YOUR FAVORITE ICE CREAM? I like to get a double cone at Baskin-Robbins with mint chip and chocolate fudge. At home my favorite is mint chip, but only with lots of little tiny chocolate flakes, not bigger chunks of chocolate.

WHAT IS YOUR LEAST FAVORITE THING ABOUT YOURSELF? Physically, I've never liked having such light-blond hair. Personality-wise, I think I'm too passive and lightminded about too many things, lacking in passion and drive and leadership mojo.

WHO DO YOU MISS THE MOST? Interesting question, but I'm not aware of missing anyone per se. I suppose I wish all my siblings lived in state.

WHAT COLOR PANTS AND SHOES ARE YOU WEARING? None. I'm just in my garmies, which I use as lounge wear around the house.

WHAT ARE YOU LISTENING TO RIGHT NOW? Ann is reading the boys stories in the next room, and electronic book keeps making animal sounds, most notably an elephant but also others.

FAVORITE SPORTS TO WATCH? I don't watch any sports. They all bore me.

HAIR COLOR? Very light blond, probably with lots of gray/white mixed in that you can't see because it's already all so light.

EYE COLOR? Dominantly blue with some hazel leanings.

DO YOU WEAR CONTACTS? Tried them once and was relieved when one of them tore, because they were uncomfortable to me. I've never felt the need to try them again. I got my wife to stop wearing them too, because they made her eyes look more tired, with circles underneath.

FAVORITE FOOD? I'm not the kind of person to commit to one and only favorite food, but I love all forms of Asian food (especially sushi and Indian), fries with ketchup, ribs, broccoli.

SCARY MOVIES OR HAPPY ENDINGS? Scary movies are not fun, but I don't like Hollywood formula movies either. I like the more independent type of stuff, with recent examples including No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood. I also really liked some of the recent raunchy comedies, which I suppose have happy endings, such as Pineapple Express, Role Models, Superbad, etc.

LAST MOVIE YOU WATCHED? Hmm, maybe Frost/Nixon? Really enjoyed that one, better than expected.

SUMMER OR WINTER? Don't like either one as well as spring and fall, but probably prefer winter over summer. I enjoy the holidays and the dark evenings, and summer bugs me for a number of reasons that I've written about before.

HUGS OR KISSES? Kisses with my wife, neither for anybody else.

FAVORITE DESSERT? I'm not a big dessert guy, but there are some things I enjoy when I'm in the mood, such as my wife's chocolate-chip cookies.

WHAT BOOK ARE YOU READING NOW? I'm currently in the middle of Bleak House, America in Danger, Rough Stone Rolling, and The Story of Edgar Sawtelle. I'm also in the middle of a novel I'm publishing later this year, Rift by Todd Robert Petersen.

WHAT IS ON YOUR MOUSE PAD? An airliner (Jordan made it for us).

WHAT DID YOU WATCH ON TV LAST NIGHT? I never watch TV, but last night I did watch an episode of Big Love on DVD. I'm only just finishing up season one and am quite engrossed in it.

FAVORITE SOUND(S). iTunes

ROLLING STONES OR BEATLES? Beatles, by far. I somewhat enjoy a couple of Stones songs, but by and large they do nothing for me, whereas the Beatles fascinate me enough to actually read books about them, let alone own pretty much all their albums.

WHAT IS THE FARTHEST YOU HAVE BEEN FROM HOME? Perth, Australia

DO YOU HAVE A SPECIAL TALENT? Writing, I suppose, although I'm no magician at it.

Random Factoids about Moi

2009-02-24T17:53:00.002-07:00

Five names you go by:
1. Chris (in person)
2. Christopher (in print, so I'm not mistaken for female)
3. Jimmy or Jimbo (my weird, random nickname at work)
4. Bigs
5. Bigsy (the Australian version of Bigs)

Two of your favorite smells:
1. Ground coffee
2. Anything printed with ink (I'm a sniffer of printed matter)

Three things you are wearing right now:
1. Mormon garments (clean too, I might add)
2. Khaki pants
3. Brown leather slip-on shoes that are sort of cloggish

Two things you want very badly at the moment:
1. To feel secure about my career (I feel queasy about my future the majority of every day)
2. To have enough free time to work on a novel

Two things you did last night:
1. Read Diary of a Wimpy Kid to the boys in their blanket tent
2. Tossed and turned with gas blasting out both ends all night

Two last things you cried over:
1. Felt some eye moisture while watching Glenn Beck's conversion story on DVD
2. Felt some eye moisture while reading student papers about abuse, addiction, murder, etc.

Two things you ate today:
1. A steak burrito on whole-wheat tortilla at Cafe Rio
2. Two boiled eggs for breakfast

Two people you last talked to on the phone:
1. My wife
2. The nurse with my colonoscopy results (the one polyp taken was benign)

Five favorite bands/songs (these are not necessarily my top five, just the first five faves that come to mind):
1. Stereolab
2. Radiohead
3. Beatles
4. Black Sabbath (until Ozzy left)
5. The Cars (first three albums only)

Two things that you are proud of:
1. Having published five books
2. Having done the treadmill three times a week for over five years now

Two things that you are not proud of:
1. That my triglycerides are high from too much fat in my diet
2. That I don't enjoy being a Mormon much even though I believe in it

Two things you are going to do tomorrow:
1. Try to catch up at work on the catalog, video scripts, etc.
2. Teach my night class at Utah Valley University

Two longest car rides:
1. In 1990 I drove from Boston to Salt Lake City when I moved
2. In 1995 I did a three-week road trip from Salt Lake City to Washington D.C., New York City, Palmyra, Kirtland, and Nauvoo—and then back again

Two favorite beverages:
1. Coke
2. Sharps

Two of your favorite memories:
1. Going on a trip to London and Paris with just my wife
2. Growing up in Rancho Palos Verdes, California until age 10

My Thoughts on Buttars

2009-02-19T21:38:00.005-07:00

I don't like Chris Buttars, the Utah legislator who spouts off racist rhetoric and is otherwise apparently a boneheaded hillbilly. After last year's kerfuffle with his "black baby" remark, I thought he should have been unseated, and I was unpleasantly surprised when he actually earned reelection.

Now he's in the news again for so-called hate speech against gays, and I again feel uncomfortable with the way he's expressed himself and with all the bad publicity he's generating. And this time my feelings are even more mixed because I also agree with some aspects of his position.

I don't hate gays or think they are completely evil or that the average gay person has any desire to bring down America. I think they are people saddled with a difficult attraction, and those who choose to follow that attraction have made a terrible mistake that I hope they can ultimately repent of. I don't presume to judge any individual's accountability, and there may be some people who honestly can't help themselves, but I don't think there's any situation where God would countenance an actual gay marriage.

I would put it differently than Buttars. I don't think that gays "will destroy the foundation of the American society." But I do agree that the gay ISSUE could well contribute to destroying our society, splitting it apart and causing God to remove his protection and blessing if and when the majority of the nation accepts something contrary to his will.

I am more alarmed by a person who does not have gay sex but who says that gay sex is fine and should be celebrated with marriage than I am by someone who has gay sex but admits it's wrong. Gay behavior is like any other vice or perversion; it's bad to do but can be repented of, and we need to be patient and understanding of those who are caught in its grip, especially if they are humble about it and do not try to redefine God's laws to accommodate their sin.

I absolutely do not accept that God created some people as gay and that they should receive special dispensation to follow their bliss, while the rest of us have to keep resisting our desires that aren't in harmony with God's laws.

We're in a war here, and the gay activists are very powerful. I'm amazed by how many Mormons who should know better are caught up in the deception that homosexuality is just like race and that the Church will eventually come around like it did with blacks and the priesthood. I definitely think the gay issue will be the main engine that divides those who follow God from those who do not, including within the Mormon church. And as more people choose to put aside God and champion the gay cause, I think society is really going to break down.

So I agree with Buttars when he says, "In my mind, it's the beginning of the end." It's a new, terrible phase that clearly shows how mixed up our nation is getting and how far from God we're getting. Never before have people actually said, "Let's take a sin and embrace it and celebrate it and put it on an equal level with real marriage." It's a whole new ballgame compared to abortion or drugs or anything else. I mean, no one has been trying to say that abortion is acceptable to God, just that people have their freedom of choice (which I agree with). But gay marriage is saying that gay unions are deserving of God's full acceptance, which they're not.

I agree with Buttars when he says, "Sodom and Gomorrah was localized. This is worldwide." Previously, one civilization could be falling apart morally while another one was on the upswing. But now we're essentially one big worldwide civilization, or fast becoming one, and when we go down, we're all going down together as a planet. I can see how the Second Coming will happen because it will be necessary, because the whole planet will have gone rotten all at once and will not be salvageable except through such a dramatic, extreme event.

I don't think there should be laws against sodomy or that we should be mean to gay people. I wish they could just live their lives and not try to gain further acceptance for their lifestyle, which I'm certain that deep down they must all sense on some level is not right. Many gays probably are content just to lie low and follow their own passions without trying to alter the civilization. But there are gay radical activists out there who will not stop until they've persuaded our civilization to not only accept but embrace their sinful lifestyle, and they are gaining in power and influence.

One main reason I'm religious is that I've experienced the devil in person for myself, so I know he's a real being, and I see his handiwork all over everything related to homosexuality and the gay movement, from tempting kids starting at a young age to think they are gay and follow same-sex temptations to carefully orchestrating the whole gay agenda and campaign, twisting it to confuse people and appeal to their sympathies by making it seem like it's an issue equivalent to racial rights.

I don't know how long it will take--I hope several more decades. But I agree with Buttars that eventually the gay issue is going to help split this nation apart and cause terrible civil war. It's the latter days, and the world is going to gradually get worse, and this whole gay thing is a BIG part of that. I honestly don't know for sure if Buttars is doing us a favor by drawing a line in the sand or if he's just making things prematurely worse (probably more of the latter). On some level, I admire his courage to say what he thinks, even if most people don't like it, including fellow Mormons who deep down think much like he does but who want to keep things peaceful and easy.

It's going to be very painful for a lot of Mormons to have to choose which side they're on and, if they do choose the right side, to stand up for it in the face of persecution that I'm sure will eventually get every bit as bad as it was for the early Mormons. I hope it takes another 100 or 200 years, but I think it will take only 10 or 20 years for things to really start getting bad, especially if we have another 10-year depression that keeps everyone in a pissy mood.

25 Random Married Things

2009-02-13T12:07:00.003-07:00

I'm afraid all my blogging mojo has migrated over to Facebook these days. It appeals to both my voyeuristic and exhibitionist tendencies, and it's fun when things happen such as your wife's gay cousin, your boss at work, and your mom all chatting together in the comment section of a particular post. Anyway, here's something I typed up over at Facebook, with a few additional tweaks:

♥ What are your middle names?
Ann: None, Me: Kimball

♥ How long have you been together?
Married 11 years in April, plus our four-month courtship/engagement.

♥ How long did you know each other before you started dating?
The extent of one brief phone call.

♥ Who asked who out?
We were set up on a blind date.

♥ How old are each of you?
Me 42, Ann 43

♥ Whose siblings do you see the most?
Probably mine. I have five out of six sisters living relatively nearby (all three brothers are in other states), while Ann has only one sibling in the state.

♥ Do you have any children together?
Three: Austin (9), Kimball (4), Zach (3)

♥ What about pets?
The kids feel like pets quite often, and we also have a cat officially named Dragon but often known as Titty.

♥ Which situation is the hardest on you as a couple?
Dealing with the baggage from my previous marriage, including two kids and their mom. That's the only thing that's ever landed us in a therapist's office, which helped, actually.

♥ Did you go to the same school?
Not for undergrad, but we both earned master's degrees at BYU.

♥ Are you from the same home town?
No, she's a Provo gal and I'm from Southern California and Bountiful, Utah.

♥ Who is smarter?
We're well matched. Ann is definitely better on things like logistics and directions. I'm more the dreamy creative type. We're both pretty logical in most areas.

♥ Who is more sensitive?
Neither one of us is very emotional, most of the time. Neither gets their feelings hurt by the other very easily. We're both quite live-and-let-live, without unrealistic expectations, grudges, all that high-maintenance crap.

♥ Where do you eat out most as a couple?
Bombay House

♥ Where is the farthest you two have traveled together as a couple?
Paris, France (but we're shooting for China this June)

♥ Who has the craziest exes?
Me, by far. My ex-wife disrupts our life at least weekly. And from what we've talked about regarding earlier partners, it sounds like I had a knack for attracting fairly dysfunctional women (up until Ann, that is).

♥ Who has the worse temper?
We're pretty close to the same. I think I yell at the kids more than she does. Ann has probably gotten madder at me than I've gotten at her, but it doesn't happen very often.

♥ Who does the cooking?
Ann does most of the time, but I'll occasionally make lunch or cook some spaghetti or macaroni for dinner.

♥ Who is more social?
Pretty close to the same. We're not very good about reciprocating invitations or reaching out socially as a couple. It seems like we just don't have time. Ann has some girlfriends from her single days that she stays in pretty close contact with, and I tend to get most of my social interaction at work.

♥ Who is the neat-freak?
Me, hands down. I'm not a white-glove kind of guy, but I'm driven crazy by a cluttery, untidy environment. Ann, on the other hand, is a great organizer/cleaner when she gets around to it, but she is content to let things pile up for weeks or even months. I think she probably has better priorities than me, though, in terms of using more of her time and energy to actually, you know, interact with the kids and stuff.

♥ Who is the more stubborn?
Neither one of us stands out as more stubborn than the other. We both have our little weird hang-ups, I guess (maybe I have slightly more than she does). We're very evenly matched on temperament, which is why we experience almost no conflict on an ongoing basis. Seriously, we just get along extremely smoothly. It's been great!

♥ Who hogs the bed?
I am probably ruder about kicking out the sheets so my feet can breathe and then sometimes pulling the covers off her when I roll over in the night. We would love to upgrade to a king-size bed sometime.

♥ Who wakes up earlier?
Most weekdays we both get up at 6:45, but sometimes Ann gets up earlier to go to the gym. On weekends, she is usually the first one up with the kids around 8:00, while I sometimes sleep until closer to 9:00.

♥ Where was your first date?
I was forty-five minutes late to Los Hermanos in Provo (I was driving down from Salt Lake, and it was during the big freeway reconstruction project, so she waited for me). After dinner, believe it or not, we went to a BYU basketball game with her parents.

♥ Who has the bigger family?
I have nine siblings, she has three.

♥ Do you get flowers often?
I'm the man, so no. I get them for her 2-3 times a year, almost always on the expected holidays. I really don't like trying to surprise people or get them gifts.

♥ How do you spend the holidays?
We alternate Thanksgiving between our extended families. We spend Christmas eve with her family and usually some close neighbor friends of theirs (we live in the same neighborhood where my wife grew up—in fact, her mom still lives across the street from us). We have Christmas morning at our house and then go up to my folks' house in Bountiful for Christmas dinner that afternoon. New Year's Eve we usually just spend home with Ann's mom.

♥ Who is more jealous?
Again, neither one, although Ann did have a weird, uncharacteristic episode of jealousy about two years ago when I was corresponding with a lady in France, who I'd never met, about critiquing each other's novels.

♥ How long did it take to get serious?
We were dating exclusively after our second date and engaged about two months after we met, then married six weeks later.

♥ Who eats more?
I eat larger portions at meals and often succumb to the temptation for seconds, but I think Ann eats more baked goods and desserts than I do.

♥ Who does/ did the laundry?
Ann does all of it, but I'd like to start sending out my work clothes more because she's already too busy and sometimes they sit for several months in the ironing pile.

♥ Who’s better with the computer?
I may be slightly better on some things, but there are also things she does better.

♥ Who drives when you are together?
I drive unless we need to get somewhere fast or follow complex directions or parallel park, and then she takes the wheel. I'm very much an autopilot driver who puts very little thought or effort into it, while she puts a lot of thought into routes and traffic patterns and gas prices and all that stuff.

Temple Photos Wanted

2009-01-29T19:00:00.001-07:00

PLEASE FORWARD AND POST THE FOLLOWING REQUEST FAR AND WIDE:

We are looking for print-quality exterior photos of all 129 LDS temples around the world (plus Kirtland), to be included in a large, full-color book about temples under contract to be published later this year.

While we need straightforward shots, we are also interested in temple photos with artistic elements, such as unusual angles, filters, and lighting, as well as close-ups of distinctive exterior elements.

In return for use of your photo(s), you will receive a credit line in the book (with your personal URL, if desired). We are asking for nonexclusive rights, so you can still use your temple photo(s) elsewhere.

Send your temple photo(s) to book designer Kelli Pratt at thedesignlady@hotmail.com. Photos must be high-res with a minimum DPI of 300. If your photo(s) is chosen for the book, you will be asked to sign a release form.

Deadline for submissions: February 15, 2009

Please forward and post this request wherever it might be appropriate.

25 Random Things about Me

2009-01-28T13:19:00.005-07:00

Here's my take on that writing prompt that's been circulating through the social networks:

1. I wear button-down shirts on MWF and polo-style shirts on TTh.

2. I was born in Newport, Rhode Island, and still feel that New England is my real spiritual homeland; I do not feel psychically at home in Utah.

3. I don't like raisins, bananas, or coconut.

4. I haven't shaved my beard once in over nine years.

5. My favorite ice cream is still Baskin-Robbins, despite all these new-fangled places.

6. I really wish I could get away with attending church only once a month—maybe when the kids are grown up.

7. I didn't like my LDS mission to Australia. I liked Australia but not the mission thing.

8. I was sealed to two women at the same time for a few years.

9. I'm surprised by how much I like our new pet cat.

10. My biggest problem in life currently is my career. I'm simultaneously dealing with dissatisfaction, worries about the future, and overwork.

11. I eat cottage cheese and peaches for breakfast every MTW, and I eat two boiled eggs every TTh.

12. I've been consistent for several years now about working up a sweat for a half-hour three times a week on the treadmill.

13. I eat out for lunch every day.

14. I'm a little fuzzy on what I really have to look forward to in life, beyond the little daily pleasures.

15. I've never broken a bone and I still have my wisdom teeth.

16. I've never watched the Super Bowl, except catching glimpses when I walked through the room.

17. I love to sit by the fire and read during the winter.

18. I love Asian food of all types, think Mexican is just OK, and find Italian food pretty boring.

19. I like London better than Paris.

20. I had Hodgkin's disease in 1994 and did the full round of chemotherapy and radiation treatment.

21. I don't attend high-school or mission reunions.

22. I feel little fear of speaking in public, as long as I know what I'm going to say. But I hate the idea of being on TV so much that I turned down an invitation from the local FOX station.

23. I'm usually sort of a glass-half-empty guy.

24. Parenthood is harder and less fun and satisfying than I thought it would be, but marriage is easier and nicer and better (at least with this spouse).

25. I follow a certain rotation of which shampoos I use on which days.

Go and do thou likewise, if you feel so inclined...

Damn, Updike's Dead

2009-01-27T11:52:00.004-07:00

Well, my favorite author is suddenly dead, and it hits me personally more than usual when a famous person dies, because I felt such a connection to his work. But now maybe I can catch up with reading all his books before I die.

I just love the way Updike writes, the great descriptions and metaphors and observations mixed with lots of sex. (In fact, even a big fan like me occasionally asks, "Do you have anything to write about other than suburban adultery?")

A couple of years ago, I sent Updike a letter and copy of my own novel Kindred Spirits, but I never heard back. I consider him an influence on my own writing, though I'm nowhere near as talented in sheer writing ability. He enboldened me somewhat to include some sex in my Mormon novel, though nowhere near as graphic as he does it. I quite envy his literary career and once may have hoped that something similar could happen for me.

I'm glad I still have several Updike novels sitting on my bookshelf for me to discover, but I'm sad that I can't look forward to any more. I wonder if his publisher has anything else left to publish posthumously. Actually, I'm not really interested in Updike's poetry, criticism, or essays, just the fiction. Man, he was amazingly prolific, with over 50 books in his career. I wonder what God thinks of him.

Another Gay Marriage Rebuttal

2009-01-24T13:35:00.003-07:00

In a recent Sunstone magazine, a person wrote a letter arguing that Mormonism could abide gay marriage if the partners are married just for earthly time, not for eternity. (He even mentioned that such marriages-for-time could take place inside the temple, but I think the church has stopped doing those, which was smart in light of today's marriage wars.) Here is my rebuttal, which I hope Sunstone will publish:

In response to Jim Rasmussen's letter (December 2008) regarding my essay "Why Mormonism Can't Abide Gay Marriage" (October 2008), let me add some more reasoning about why Mormonism shouldn't and can't, in my opinion, ever condone same-sex marriage, not even just for time rather than eternity.

First of all, Mormonism abhors a sealing vacuum. The church takes pains to encourage everyone to get sealed for eternity to a spouse. In fact, it's better for a woman to remain sealed to her civilly divorced husband than to revert to an unsealed state. After I was divorced, my ex-wife was not able to cancel our sealing until she had found a new husband with whom to become sealed in the temple. So if the church condones marriage for time between same-gender spouses, that removes those parties from the possibility, however slight it may be, of getting properly sealed to a spouse for eternity. (The most difficult case remains that of men who marry widows who were previously sealed to someone else; while it's true that these men apparently remain unsealed to a spouse for now, any progeny are sealed by virtue of the wife's prior sealing. Of course, in many if not most cases, such marriages happen in later life, and the male was already previously sealed to a spouse too, so he's already taken care of and there's no sealing vacuum.)

Secondly, and more importantly, is the issue of actual gay sexual relations, which Rasmussen did not address in his letter. Just because the church seems to have adopted a don't-ask-don't-tell policy regarding oral sex between heterosexual marriage partners doesn't mean that it could ever come anywhere near accepting gay sexual practices, which it would be doing if it condoned gay marriage in any form. In my essay, I tried to address this issue in muted language, but now I will be more blunt: God has a penis. Created in his image, his male children also have penises, and they are commanded to use them only in Godlike ways within marriage. If we say that it's OK under certain circumstances for males to manipulate each other's penises or insert them into each other's mouths or rectums, then we have to imagine male gods being able to do that amongst themselves with their own genitals, which of course makes reason stare, at least for most of us. (Equivalent logic can be applied with females.) So if we can't imagine our corporeal God doing this, that makes gay sex an unholy and impure practice that Mormonism can never accommodate on any terms. We're here to learn to become like God, especially in the sexual arena, and there is no temporary allowance or validation for earthly sexual perversion, even for those burdened with seemingly insurmountable exclusively same-gender attraction.

When I hear liberal Mormons romanticize the notion of gay marriage, I think they are glossing over the cold reality that the physical aspects of such unions are simply unacceptable in Mormon theology, period. Personally, I believe that oral sex between married heterosexuals is also an unholy and impure practice to some degree, even if the church has backed off from trying to outright prohibit it, and I feel that society's recent open acceptance of this practice has indirectly strengthened the gay agenda. While I personally don't pretend to fully understand the same-gender-attraction dilemma and would never judge any individual's accountability in that area, the fact remains that physical gay couplings of any kind run counter to Mormon theology and can never be accepted through consecrating gay unions via marriage, even if only for time.

Evaluating President Bush

2009-01-21T16:57:00.003-07:00

It's easy for me to get caught up in the media-led dislike of Bush and evaluation of his presidency as one big failure. I admit that my gut feeling toward Bush has been fairly negative, and that includes his cronies Cheney and Rumsfeld.

However, this address of Senator Hatch's before the U.S. Senate is a good counter-balance to that kind of thinking and helps me look at Bush with a little more appreciation and respect. I recommend taking a good look at Hatch's evaluation of Bush's presidency. Personally, I think Bush's biggest sign of success is that there have been no terrorist attacks on our country since 9-11, though I'm sure they're still trying with all their might.

I'm pretty high on Obama right now, caught up in his charisma and the historical significance of his ascendancy. However, there's an accompanying shadow in my thinking that if Obama fails, the results could be much worse than Bush's failures, with another major economic depression, terrorists making new inroads into our country, and moral depravity further removing us from God's protection and blessings.

Realities of Writing

2009-01-20T06:04:00.000-07:00

Jonathan Langford has made some comments recently in two venues about the realities of writing, and I've felt myself prompted to respond to him in both venues.

First, in response to his very interesting post at A Motley Vision:

I have an ongoing mental conversation with myself about the role that creative/fiction writing should have in my life. Sometimes I’ve got myself convinced that it’s the equivalent of a hobby, but other times I realize that it’s too much work to be considered a hobby, and you can’t help but hope the work might lead to successful publication, which makes it a would-be profession, not a hobby.

I too write/edit for a living. Even when I’m doing all kinds of whorish work solely for money, as I have been doing with all my spare time recently, I am fantasizing about getting back to my novel, memoir, personal blog, etc. I do get a buzz from working on all of those personal outlets, although I also cause myself some anxiety by trying to get myself onto schedules and by thinking too much about publication prospects. I really do hope to get my personal creative writing more onto the hobby level, somehow, something that may be possible now that I’m middle aged and have already tried and failed so many times at monetizing/professionalizing my creative writing.

I’m really hoping 2009 brings me a few open months for personal writing, but hopefully not because the paying work dries up!

And now, my response to Jonathan's recent post on AML-List, titled "Economic downturn and Mormon letters":

Well, as I think I've already pointed out, the downturn has directly affected Mormon publishing, with Signature on hiatus and Cedar Fort holding an emergency liquidation sale due to massive returns of unsold merchandise from retailers. At Zarahemla Books, we've noticed a big slowdown in sales in the last quarter of 2008, and our wholesale distributor in the LDS market is nearly a year behind in our consignment payments, which fortunately hasn't affected our cash flow needs yet but will catch up to us soon, if they don't cough up.

Z had a good 2008 because of Doug Thayer's Hooligan, even though we released only one new book (Angel Falling Softly) that has sold only about 100 copies. Total revenues for Z were about $18,000 for 2008 with no grants, all book sales, and we spent about that much too. (I don't take any direct salary out now that I've paid off my personal loans to the biz, but I do have Z pay for business-related computers, cell phone, travel, meals, etc. And every book or magazine I ever buy is paid for by Z. I wish I could justify having Z pay for my music and movies too...)

Personally, my problem is that I have way too much paid writing/editing work on my plate, for which I'm very grateful, but it's taking away from time I can spend on Z and my own personal creative writing, let alone family, house, church, community, etc. I've been working 60-hour weeks for several months now on both salaried and freelance writing/editing jobs, and I find the constant deadline pressure quite wearying. There have been layoffs at my day job but I have survived and feel pretty secure, as the executives seem to value having a strong communications guy around (there's another good writer on staff here too).

For me, freelance shows no sign of slowing down yet. The Dummies people keep pitching editing projects my way, some of which I've had to turn down, and the publisher I work with in England is, at this very moment, pitching a new line of seven Mormon-themed books to a big distributor owned by Baker & Taylor; he even wants to start a new Mormon-themed imprint. If even just some of that plays out, I'll be slammed for years to come and may even need to subcontract out some writing.

I live in almost daily fear of layoffs and the financial privation and debt that would ensue, but part of me would relish having six months off to really focus on my own personal projects, especially getting out another novel. The reality, of course, is that those six months would be very stressful and go by very fast, so it's not something I really do wish. And of course, you wouldn't know if it would turn out to be six months or longer, so you couldn't really relax and enjoy it. If unemployed, I would feel guilty taking 3-4 hours a day for a novel when I should be spending all my waking hours looking for real income-earning opportunities. Plus, I have so many kids and other distractions at home that I wonder how much work I would really get done as a home-based writer.

Nevertheless, I wonder very often about seeing if I could match my corporate salary through freelance, including teaching adjunct courses at local colleges. (I wouldn't expect to match corporate benefits, but fortunately my wife could get those through her half-day kindergarten teaching gig.) I fear that it would be feast or famine, though. I think that if I get laid off this year, I would give myself a year to see if I could develop a viable full-time freelance writing/editing business, but I fear that at the end of that year I'd be frazzled and in debt tens of thousands on my home equity line just to keep my family functioning. I really admire people who can make self-employment work. My dad has been largely self-employed for more than 30 years, and while he managed to keep our family of 10 kids functioning and my mom out of the workforce except for giving piano lessons at home (often full time), he's had some desperate times and financial hardships, and he's got no retirement cushion. I'm not sure I have the stomach for that.

I think many creative/literary writers have produced good work under economic stress, though. Dickens and Twain both did, I understand. And I think I remember hearing that Orson Scott Card has felt pressure to produce work that would bring in the most income for his family and staff. I wonder if, under economic stress, I could get myself to think more commercially and write something creative that would actually sell rather than something I just feel like writing for self-expression. I would love it if I could run a full-time freelance operation in which creative writing earned a certain percentage of my income and I made up the rest with work for hire, marketing/business communications, teaching, eBay sales, lawn care, gigolo services, etc.

Notes on Vasectomy

2009-01-16T17:47:00.002-07:00

Over on the Feminist Mormon Housewives blog, they've been talking about vasectomies, and I've been commenting:

I had my V at age 40, almost three years ago. Sex has been noticeably better for me since then, with no fertility/pregnancy anxieties. And my wife ASKED me to do it, so I felt no guilt about cutting off the sperm pipeline for selfish reasons. (I believe women call more shots in the procreation arena than men do.)

The procedure itself was not a big deal, and it was funny how the doctor was selling me on his reversal services even as he was snipping me. I used frozen peas too and only one Lortab. After one clean sperm-free checkup, my wife let me skip the subsequent follow-up checks. (It’s not that fun rubbing one out in the restroom.)

Thumbs up. And what’s been great is that my wife has never second-guessed the decision, even after holding someone’s newborn. She knew she was DONE. Of course, she was 41, probably close to being done naturally anyway–but we’d just had a surprise pregnancy only nine months after the previous one. We’d had a five-year dry spell after our first kid and did fertility treatments that didn’t work, but then a few years later things suddenly kicked back into gear for no apparent reason for numbers two and three, and it was like “Turn it off! Turn it off!”

Some months after my V, my wife had an IUD put in just to control periods, and those have pretty much dried up now, just a little spotting every few months. Woo hoo! We like married sex with no baggage.

+++++

Responding to #41: I served a mission in colorful-lingo Australia, so “rub one out” may have come from there, although I thought I’d heard it several times before here in the States too. I think the term is mostly used for pre-date masturbation when one wants to take the edge off so one can perform longer later on.

My other favorite Aussie sexual terms are “cracking a fat” for getting an erection and “rubbing uglies” for male-female genital intercourse.

Another favorite Aussie-ism I still use is “Who opened their lunch?” for when someone emits a silent odor in company.

+++++

I think there is now a home sperm testing kit available, or at least I read an article last year that said one was being planned. That would be convenient for post-V patients.

A couple of other notes about the actual process: I’ve had many moles removed, and I’d say the V was only slightly more involved than having two moles removed in one visit. There was a twinge of gut discomfort at one point, the same feeling as when one is bumped in the balls, but it was fleeting. I remember that when the doc cut the cord, it made a rather loud snip, as if it were made of firm stuff.

As far as after-effects, I remember feeling some lumps along the cord some weeks after the procedure, but I think they went away. (I don’t go looking for them anymore–I was told they’re normal.) I still don’t understand where the sperm goes now, but the ejaculate doesn’t look any less or different. But I also have to admit that I don’t understand why my water softener doesn’t make my water salty, even though it’s been explained to me several times.

I remember that after the procedure, I was expecting the nice young nurse to come back and give the area a sponge bath, but they sent me home pretty yucky down there, with disinfectant and blood and whatnot.

I’ve always said there’s a vas deferens between men and women…

+++++

Responding to #63: I was in Victoria too (1986-88), and I have heard the variations you mentioned. But I’ve also heard them the way I stated them.

I loved how Aussies said “damn” and “hell” even at church, even from the podium. I still do that too. And I always thought the word “stuffed” was funny, both as a replacement for the f-word and meaning you’re pregnant. You never sit back after a meal and say, “Well, I’m stuffed.”

Paying My Authors

2009-01-09T18:41:00.003-07:00

I just finished writing over $1,600 in annual royalty checks to the authors whose books I've published through my Zarahemla Books enterprise. While this puts a big dent in the Zarahemla checking account, it's fun to actually pay people for their writing.

The big winner for 2008 was definitely Doug Thayer, who received over $1,000 in royalties for Hooligan: A Mormon Boyhood, which has now sold over 1,700 copies since I published it in 2007. In contrast, I personally received about $30 in royalties for my novel Kindred Spirits, which has now sold a grand total of 93 copies since publication. And you know what? That sounds just fine to me, definitely worth having written it.

I may do a more detailed annual report on Zarahemla soon, but I am too busy at both work and home to do it now. January is shaping up to be a hellishly busy month, and February isn't looking much better as far as having too much freelance work and too many kids. But hey—at least I have good income! There were layoffs at my day job today, so I'm feeling grateful to still have a regular salary.

I Made the Washington Times Belief Blog

2009-01-07T16:45:00.002-07:00

My recent article in Sunstone titled "Why Mormonism Can't Abide Gay Marriage" was the topic of a post today at the Washington Times Belief Blog.

It's a fairly neutral, respectful post. Is the Washington Times the paper that's owned by the Moonies?

My Classic English Novel Kick

2008-12-31T11:03:00.002-07:00

In recent times, I've been getting more into classic English novels again. I remember one of my favorite college classes was an English novel class in which I discovered Vanity Fair, Middlemarch, Jane Eyre, Moll Flanders, and Jane Austen. (However, I rather disliked what little I read of Wuthering Heights and wasn't crazy about Hardy's Jude the Obscure or Dickins's Hard Times, both of which I believe I finished. The one bit of unfinished business from that class was Tom Jones, a thick novel that I enjoyed but didn't get very far into.)

Anyway, what's gotten me into these novels again is that I've been watching dramatizations of them, mainly produced by BBC. The guys here at work tease me about it, but I just totally love those shows. Right now we're doing Dickins's Bleak House and I'm doing Middlemarch, and both are almost thrillingly good. I suppose I love the combination of the setting, the bygone English culture, the accents, the good characterization, and the wonderful performances. I even love the Jane Austen ones, which just makes my male coworkers hoot and holler with derision. But I am what I am.

I recently ordered Vanity Fair—which is perhaps my favorite of them all—and Middlemarch to read again, which is a rare step for me because I practically never reread novels. And I'd really like to get my Dickins on and work my way through him. Though Hard Times didn't particularly impress me, a couple of years ago I was unexpectedly taken with David Copperfield, which I started reading just by random chance and couldn't put down, and I think I'll try to pick up Bleak House this year, though it's dauntingly thick and the first few pages I browsed last night featured rather long, complex sentences that zonked me out pretty quick. (As I get older, I find that reading puts me to sleep disconcertingly fast.)

Comments on Mormon Publishing

2008-12-21T14:50:00.002-07:00

Here are some thoughts I shared with an AML-List guy who does a year-end report on Mormon publishing:

The main reason why Zarahemla slowed down in 2008 is not financial—with over 1,000 copies sold, Thayer's Hooligan refilled the coffers nicely—but because I got caught up in a lot of freelance work for other publishers. I was hired by Wiley to edit Power Boating for Dummies, and I'm working on several Mormon-themed titles for a publisher in England that wants to start a Mormon imprint, tentatively named Liahona Press. The books are not literary, but they are lucrative. They're in full color and suitable for stacking deep and cheap at Costco, which has already placed some very large orders.

Fortunately, 2009 looks like several excellent things could be published by Zarahemla. Todd Robert Petersen's novel is under contract with Zarahemla and undergoing final revisions, with Brady Udall on board to blurb (whose own next novel was just delivered to Norton this month, I'm told, where Udall's champion Carol Houck Smith recently passed away, unfortunately). Serious discussions have taken place with Angela Hallstrom to put together a Mormon fiction anthology, Mahonri Stewart to put together an anthology of play scripts with an introduction by Orson Scott Card, Darin Cozzens (whose writing I love) to publish a story collection, Stephen Carter to publish a collection of personal essays (some contest winners and/or previously published in reputable Mormon journals), and a few others. Also, Zarahemla will likely publish volume two of the Mormon Tabernacle Enquirer, a collection of satirical Mormon news from the old Sugar Beet website and other sources.

Zarahemla has also made well-received overtures to two well-established authors with exciting, promising Mormon-themed projects that these authors are still trying to sell to national publishers, and we hope that one or both will choose Zarahemla if national publishers don't pick them up. I probably better not say who, since talks are so preliminary.

I hope many of these projects will come to fruition in 2009; it's the most exciting stuff we've had in the pipeline at one time since Zarahemla started, and more than one author has commented to me that he or she undertook his or her project because Zarahemla, in fact, exists.

I find that Zarahemla is negotiating only with writers with whom we are already familiar through their previously published writing or through literary circles. While we receive a steady stream of unsolicited manuscripts, very few of these manuscripts are even reviewed anymore, and we generally won't invest time in anything unless, at a minimum, it comes with recommendations from people we know and trust. In other words, if Orson Scott Card forwards us your novel and urges us to consider it, we will.

As is likely the case with many publishers large and small, sales are way down for Zarahemla in this last quarter. As soon as the stock market started getting wonky this past autumn, people seemed to stop ordering books from our website, and things picked back up only a little for Christmas. I know that Cedar Fort recently held an emergency liquidation sale at their warehouse because they've received so many returns of unsold merchandise from retailers. So that might make 2009 a bad year for introducing books, with new titles certain to sell fewer copies than if they had been published, say, a year earlier.

This Year's Christmas Letter

2008-12-14T20:21:00.007-07:00

See if you can guess who wrote the following, me or my wife Ann:

Greetings from the Bigelows, who are so full of Christmas cheer we can taste it when we burp. Here's the rundown on our year:

Chris & Ann: Enjoyed London and Paris for our 10th anniversary, but will be glad when this stressful year is over, with its overabundance of spirited children, moonlighting freelance jobs, and crazy stuff in the news. Here's hoping 2009 is a little mellower! (But not too mellow, which is a danger in this economy...)

Jordan (13): Is playing the tuba and learning German, but isn't too interested in following through on the regular ol' subjects. Recently refurbished an old computer and sold it for a profit on eBay. Future entrepreneur? We wish we saw him more than every month or two...

Sophie (11): Has been living with us since early this year. Is playing the clarinet in the school band and recently joined a swim team. Quirky sense of humor, especially when we forget her morning pill.

Austin (9): Is our performer, loving choir and community theater. Is waiting to see what part he'll play in this spring's production of Oliver. When asked if performing onstage makes him nervous, got a puzzled look on his face, as if he didn't even understand the question. Sometimes acts like he could use one of Sophie's pills...

Kimball (4): Ah, our intense one. Enjoyed his first year of BYU preschool, learning how to read and studying the anatomy of spiders. Likes to go on walks and get what he wants when he wants it. Could maybe use half a pill from time to time...

Zachary (2): Our brown-eyed boy with questionable DNA (except the big head). Just surrendered his pacifiers to Santa so Santa could give them to some babies, because pacifiers are for babies. Likes to play with the new kitty. Doesn't really need any pills.

From our home to yours, complete with all our most heartfelt sounds and odors, we wish you a merry Christmas and a happy new year. (We were going to send you a figgy pudding, but we had a pudding fight with it during family home evening the other night...)

New Release from Zarahemla Books

2008-12-10T15:44:00.002-07:00

Here's some information about the newest release from my Mormon publishing company:

When Harris Thatcher’s father dies, the boy’s journey into manhood becomes complicated with questions of faith, the meaning of life, and the capriciousness of death. Harris soon finds himself preaching the Mormon gospel as one of the first missionaries to West Germany following the devastation of World War II. Little does he know that his own war horrors await him upon his return home, when he is drafted into the Korean War.

Starting out in the same 1940s-era Provo, Utah, that Thayer brought to life in his memoir Hooligan: A Mormon Boyhood, this novel deepens and darkens as Harris is drawn into his harrowing Korean ordeal. Will he survive the war, not only physically but also emotionally and spiritually? And if he does survive, what other trials does death hold in store?

“Thayer is one of the most truthful writers of fiction I know. Add to that the clarity and beauty of his writing, and his fiction is always illuminating in every sense.”

—Orson Scott Card

“Doug Thayer’s The Tree House ranks with The Red Badge of Courage in its creation of the ghastly bubble inhabited by a soldier in battle. Claustrophobic, electrified by panic, astonishingly intimate, Thayer’s chapters on war have a power we have not seen from him before. There is not a shred of moralizing here, yet the book nourishes the soul from start to finish.”

—Elouise Bell, BYU professor, emeritus

“Douglas Thayer’s writing style is an acquired taste—short, pungent, declarative sentences. But once caught in its grip, one swings along like Tarzan from branch to branch, confident that one will not fall! I have never read such a powerful exposition of the realities of war. The Tree House is an outstanding novel. All who read it, regardless of their background, will be deeply touched.”

—John A. Taylor

“I was totally engrossed in The Tree House. The depictions of Harris growing up in Provo, serving an LDS mission in post-war Germany, and fighting in the Korean War are excellently crafted. I’ve never read a better or more gripping treatment of men at war. Thayer’s characters and places are real; they are alive. This novel is literature, and reading it is a splendid experience.”

—Richard Cracroft
BYU professor of English, emeritus

This title is available for ordering now at the Zarahemla Books website (delivery before Christmas is likely but not guaranteed). Will be available soon at Amazon and other retailers.