LDS Members: What do you think of Tony Award winning musical The Book of Mormon?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yellowbird
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

yellowbird

Guest
Wondered how the LDS church members felt about the musical? Have you heard much about it? Has it been discussed in your church? Would you go see it?

I don’t know too much about it - other than the one song I heard sung tonight. Although I giggled at parts ("… in 1978 (?) God changed his mind about black people") - I sort of cringed too, imagining how I’d feel if someone made fun of my beliefs. Athough there are musicals that do poke fun / make Catholic seem sort of wacky. Nunsense is one that comes to mind and also the play, Doubt, both of which I would see.

What are your thoughts about the musical The Book of Mormon?
 
I heard one song on you tube because of the buzz on the net. It was a take off of the Lion King Song about no worries. The Mormon missionary was apparently singing the phrase and asked what it literally meant. The literal translation is #### you God he is told and they sing that phrase in English.
So I would say Trey Parker and Matt Stone were doing more than making fun of Mormons…
 
Rightlydivide said:
I heard one song on you tube because of the buzz on the net. It was a take off of the Lion King Song about no worries. The Mormon missionary was apparently singing the phrase and asked what it literally meant. The literal translation is #### you God he is told and they sing that phrase in English.
So I would say Trey Parker and Matt Stone were doing more than making fun of Mormons…
Click to expand...
In the musical, that phrase is apparently used by the Ugandas because they blame Him for their poverty, wars, AIDS etc. Although it’s offensive to me, I can understand why some people might feel that God has forgotten about them and so they express their strong feels like, who needs Him?

I’ve read lots of reviews online - one Salt Lake City newspaper said it was “suprisingly sweet” once you get beyond some of the raunchiness.

Because I haven’t seen it - I have no idea if that’s true. I’m mostly wondering if LDS members would see it?
 
Rightlydivide said:
I heard one song on you tube because of the buzz on the net. It was a take off of the Lion King Song about no worries. The Mormon missionary was apparently singing the phrase and asked what it literally meant. The literal translation is #### you God he is told and they sing that phrase in English.
So I would say Trey Parker and Matt Stone were doing more than making fun of Mormons…
Click to expand...
Parker and Stone are atheists, and say so here. Based on their other satires of religion, they seem to be atheists of a post-modern type. They think all religion are preposterous, but they aren’t bitter about it, and think that religion does make people happy, etc.

It think this accounts for why it is surprisingly sweet: they are not post-modernists, rather than New Atheists.

I have listened to one of the songs entitled “I Believe,” that was played in an atheist podcast by the Freedom From Religion Foundation. It basically presents faith as the same stupid caricature we have heard for years, as blind trust based essentially on ignoring evidence. That Mormon theology rather than something else provided that matter for the lyrics has no bearing on the basic point of the song, which was obviously meant to apply to all religion.
 
Matt and Trey are not atheists. Matt has stated he’s agnostic but probably believes there is a God, and Trey has said he believes in God but isn’t particularly devout. Here they are talking about their religious beliefs and atheism:

youtube.com/watch?v=Yx7oVGdv-SI

abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Entertainment/story?id=2479197&page=3

I haven’t seen The Book of Mormon, but I’ve heard it’s not demeaning at all. Matt and Trey treat all religions and atheism with a similar reverence and criticism.
 
The Mormons I know are indifferent about it.

My daughter was singing one of the songs this morning from the play. She is not Mormon, and was made aware of the existence of the play and the associated music by a Mormon friend. They were having a good time with it, especially the opening number “Hello” and “Sal Tlay Ka Siti”…which is where we live…waterfalls, unicorns, no suffering or pain…the roofs are thatched with gold!
 
SamTheNewfie said:
Matt and Trey are not atheists. Matt has stated he’s agnostic but probably believes there is a God, and Trey has said he believes in God but isn’t particularly devout. Here they are talking about their religious beliefs and atheism:

youtube.com/watch?v=Yx7oVGdv-SI

abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Entertainment/story?id=2479197&page=3

I haven’t seen The Book of Mormon, but I’ve heard it’s not demeaning at all. Matt and Trey treat all religions and atheism with a similar reverence and criticism.
Click to expand...
I am not saying that the show tries to be demeaning. They clearly intend it as good fun, and they have no special axe to grind with Mormonism. Nevertheless, their critique of religion both from what I have heard from the cast album and from their religious satires on South Park reflects a postmodern worldview. They take hatchets to the truth of religious claims, but they still value religion for what it does for people. That is why they are not mean-spirited about it, but that does not amount to a vindication. The grounds for their friendly jabs at religion are themselves inimical to Christianity.
 
It’s nice to know they have a good attitude about it… I like the last quote in the article - “It’s better than being tared and feathered.” Aint that the truth?!

And why not take advantage of the free publicity? One thing I give them credit for - they certainly market themselves well.
 
yellowbird said:
It’s nice to know they have a good attitude about it… I like the last quote in the article - “It’s better than being tared and feathered.” Aint that the truth?!

And why not take advantage of the free publicity? One thing I give them credit for - they certainly market themselves well.
Click to expand...
The point I am trying to make here is that it isn’t better then being tarred and feathered. It’s extremely dangerous and evil. Sure, Parker and Stone don’t hate Christianity, but they still have a toxic, anti-Christian message. A person who says, “I like you guys and I like what your Church does for people, dispite the fact that it is totally false,” is teaching an indifference to truth that is as belittling to religion as open bigotry.

I mentioned in an earlier post, that Parker and Stone are not New Atheists. That was not a compliment. Of those people who have hardened their hearts against God, I have far more respect for the ones who rage Him aloud than the weak, liberal sort who play nice, discard accountability, and never come to terms with the importance of truth.
 
soren1 said:
The point I am trying to make here is that it isn’t better then being tarred and feathered. It’s extremely dangerous and evil. Sure, Parker and Stone don’t hate Christianity, but they still have a toxic, anti-Christian message. A person who says, “I like you guys and I like what your Church does for people, dispite the fact that it is totally false,” is teaching an indifference to truth that is as belittling to religion as open bigotry.

I mentioned in an earlier post, that Parker and Stone are not New Atheists. That was not a compliment. Of those people who have hardened their hearts against God, I have far more respect for the ones who rage Him aloud than the weak, liberal sort who play nice, discard accountability, and never come to terms with the importance of truth.
Click to expand...
The songs I heard didn’t dis all Christianity - just Mormanism. The song “Believe” was funny to me because their beliefs ARE so outlandish compared to mainstream Christianity. The musical would only be evil if Mormanism were true.

Since I don’t think it’s true - IMO it’s no more evil than a funny musical about Jehovah’s Witnesses or Scientologists.

I don’t doubt what you say about the Parker & Stone not being believers - just not sure it matters. I’d guess that a lot of Broadway musicals I’ve seen were produced by non-believers. Same with Hollywood movies. Most are liberals who “*sort of play nice, discard accountability and never come to terms with the importance of truth.” *So I disagree with their political and religious views… but I still enjoy their art.
 
yellowbird said:
The songs I heard didn’t dis all Christianity - just Mormanism. The song “Believe” was funny to me because their beliefs ARE so outlandish compared to mainstream Christianity. The musical would only be evil if Mormanism were true.

Since I don’t think it’s true - IMO it’s no more evil than a funny musical about Jehovah’s Witnesses or Scientologists.

I don’t doubt what you say about the Parker & Stone not being believers - just not sure it matters. I’d guess that a lot of Broadway musicals I’ve seen were produced by non-believers. Same with Hollywood movies. Most are liberals who “*sort of play nice, discard accountability and never come to terms with the importance of truth.” *So I disagree with their political and religious views… but I still enjoy their art.
Click to expand...
I am not saying that Parker & Stone, because they are unbelievers, are automatically unable to create good art. Of course there are excellent Hollywood Movies written by non-Christians, even some pro-Catholic films. One easy example of this is “A Man for All Seasons.” In the preface to the print edition of the play, Robert Bolt says he is neither a Catholic nor even “a Christian in the meaningful sense of the word,” and that he wrote the play to celebrate More’s commitment to his conscience, his unwillingness to lie to save his hide, rather than the truth of his religious beliefs. The text contains some intimation of this fact, and is a weakness in both the film and the play. Yet even so, commitment to conscience is a Christian virtue anyway - it certainly presupposes the existence of transcendent moral value, which cannot originate properly from a secular worldview.

By contrast, the problem with Parker and Stone is not simply that they are secularists, whether atheist or agnostic, but that their critique of religion reflects a secular worldview, far more removed from the Christian roots of Western civilization than Bolt’s morality was. What they find funny about Mormonism - and this comes out in any treatment they give of religion, including their spoofs of Catholicism in South Park - is the fact that people sincerely believe in it. What for example is the main joke In the song, “I Believe”? Is it that Mormon doctrine is super strange? In fact, Parker and Stone think all religions are equally weird and that Mormonism is no stranger than any other beliefs. Rather, the main joke in the song in the mere fact of the missionary’s strong commitment to believing in something. That is the core gag; funny bits from Mormon doctrine just provide the punch lines. It is faith as such, not Mormonism, that is their main target.

There are good reasons to reject Mormonism, but that is not one of them. Clearly seen, it is not even funny. It reflects the reasoning of a skeptical worldview. The fact that it targets Mormonism, something we don’t like, instead of Catholicism, which we do like, does not matter a whit.
 
soren1 said:
I am not saying that Parker & Stone, because they are unbelievers, are automatically unable to create good art. Of course there are excellent Hollywood Movies written by non-Christians, even some pro-Catholic films. One easy example of this is “A Man for All Seasons.” In the preface to the print edition of the play, Robert Bolt says he is neither a Catholic nor even “a Christian in the meaningful sense of the word,” and that he wrote the play to celebrate More’s commitment to his conscience, his unwillingness to lie to save his hide, rather than the truth of his religious beliefs. The text contains some intimation of this fact, and is a weakness in both the film and the play. Yet even so, commitment to conscience is a Christian virtue anyway - it certainly presupposes the existence of transcendent moral value, which cannot originate properly from a secular worldview.

By contrast, the problem with Parker and Stone is not simply that they are secularists, whether atheist or agnostic, but that their critique of religion reflects a secular worldview, far more removed from the Christian roots of Western civilization than Bolt’s morality was. What they find funny about Mormonism - and this comes out in any treatment they give of religion, including their spoofs of Catholicism in South Park - is the fact that people sincerely believe in it. What for example is the main joke In the song, “I Believe”? Is it that Mormon doctrine is super strange? In fact, Parker and Stone think all religions are equally weird and that Mormonism is no stranger than any other beliefs. Rather, the main joke in the song in the mere fact of the missionary’s strong commitment to believing in something. That is the core gag; funny bits from Mormon doctrine just provide the punch lines. It is faith as such, not Mormonism, that is their main target.

There are good reasons to reject Mormonism, but that is not one of them. Clearly seen, it is not even funny. It reflects the reasoning of a skeptical worldview. The fact that it targets Mormonism, something we don’t like, instead of Catholicism, which we do like, does not matter a whit.
Click to expand...
OK, I see what you’re saying. And after giving it some thought, I think you are probably right. Thank you, for helping me to see this differently.
 
I haven’t seen the musical, but I’ve seen the South Park episode that the musical is based upon. I was impressed with the light touch they used for this one. I thought it was pretty funny, though I’m not sure my Mormon friends would find it so.

However, the South Park episode was not as funny…or as profound…as Monty Python’s Life of Brian.
 
I’m new here, and obviously pretty lame in that I always seem to be posting to threads that have been dormant for more than a month! But I figured at least ONE Mormon ought to respond to the question.

I haven’t seen the play, but have read some reviews. I don’t get too worked-up about things like this, because they’re so transitory (can you name the Tony-Award winners from 2009 or 2010?). Our history is loaded with dime novel caricatures in the 19th century and goof-ball anti-Mormon writers in the 20th and 21st (Ed Decker, Loftes Tryk … the list is too long).

But we’ve had a pretty good run here lately, haven’t we? With those two knuckleheads Mitt Romney and Silver Spoon Johnny Huntsman running for president, with Big Love on HBO and The Book of Mormon on Broadway, we’re beginning to approach the rarified air that y’all had with The DaVinci Code and Angels and Demons (Tom Hanks doesn’t much care for us, either!)😛

We’ve been at this sort of thing long enough that there’s even been attention given to its history by prominent LDS scholars. The best treatment, in my opinion, is by the first-rate scholar Terryl L. Givens, who wrote a book titled Viper on the Hearth - Mormons, Myths, and the Construction of Heresy that is published by Oxford University Press.

Another scholar, Richard Bushan (probably the world’s expert on the life of Joseph Smith) gave an interview to CNN where he was questioned about the musical. I agree with how he frames the issue (but then, he’s a lot smarter than me!) You can read it here:

inthearena.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/27/richard-bushman-the-book-of-mormon-is-like-looking-into-a-fun-house-mirror-the-reflection-is-hilarious-but-not-really-you/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top