Posted on 04/23/2010 9:33:26 AM PDT by Colofornian
One of the quirkiest, and enjoyable edgy Mormon fiction out there remains “Brother Brigham,” (2007, Zarahemla Books) It’s a pity that probably only a few hundred people have read the novel. Utah Author D. Michael Martindale’s bizarre, at times sexy tale prompts the attentive LDS reader to really wonder if they’re faith is as strong as they might like to think it is.
“Brother Brigham,” set in Salt Lake County, involves Cory Horace “C.H.” Young, descendent of Brigham Young, married in the temple to Danielle. A BYU “marriage” dropout with dreams of being a violinist, he works in a bookstore and lives in a tiny duplex with his wife and two sons, Petey and Glenn. At the bookstore there’s a cute bohemian girl named Sheila who dabbles in satanism.
One day, out of the blue, “Brigham Young” appears to C.H. and tells him that the LDS Church has slipped into apostasy and that he, C.H., has been called of God to restore the Gospel. “Brigham” informs C.H. that polygamy must also be restored. “Brigham” leads C.H. to hidden away money in the desert west of Salt Lake City. The angel, using the same type of language as the Prophet Joseph Smith records in Mormon accounts, pushes C.H. to get things rolling. C.H. reluctantly agrees. He manages to convince his skeptical wife, and then follows the angel’s commandment to marry Satan-dabbler Sheila, who perhaps not surprisingly given her personality, accepts C.H.’s offer. Things start to spiral out of control when “Brigham” commands C.H. to take an underage ward teen, Cyndy, as a second plural wife.
“Brother Brigham” is a lighter novel than may appear from the brief partial synopsis. C.H. is very reluctant to take on what he’s been commanded to do despite promises from “Brigham” that he will be successful. There’s a lot of sex in Martindale’s prose. This will never be a novel found on the virgin shelves of Deseret Book. One funny, sexy sequence involves C.H. and Sheila’s wedding night where, at least for the groom, “plural love” turns into solo lust.
I won’t give away the ending of Brother Brigham, although a turn in the plot and the climax are quite clever. Mormon lore abounds in “Brother Brigham.” A promise in C.H.’s patriarchal blessing seems to hint at what will occur to him. When “Brigham” appears to C.H., he follows Mormon lore by asking the angel to shake hands with him. The plot also includes references to the Book of Mormon and wrestling with demons and raging theological debates Parley P. Pratt-style.
“Brother Brigham” is not a book critical of the LDS faith, but its very plot forces the honest Mormon reader to confront two uncomfortable thoughts. How many of us, if we had lived in the time of Joseph Smith, would have believed a 14-year-old boy had been visted by Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ? And, a question perhaps even more difficult to answer, is: Had we been members of the early LDS Church, how many of us would have agreed to ditch our matrimonial covenants and pursue wives half our age? Would we have thought that was of God, or a product of lust?
These are not questions that today’s Mormons ponder often. In fact, most of us have become quite comfortable scorning fundamentalist polygamist Mormons for their “sinful” lifestyles.
“Brother Brigham,” besides being a great read, reminds us that we’re pretty lucky to be Mormons in 2010, where C.H’s experiences remain something that we’re not likely to have to deal with.
Facts, they are for Gentiles...
Thanks. Do you think this summary I found is a bit too nuanced? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauvoo_Expositor#Oaks.27_analysis
I usually don’t use wiki for any serious studies unless they have links to actual sources - due to the liberal editorial policies and how different groups have grossly slanted different articles. For example from the link -
“Nauvoo’s charter granted the city council powers equal to the Illinois legislature within the jurisdiction of Nauvoo. “
That is not true, the charter specifically states that all laws generated were subject to the state and could not violate the constitution. Similar charters were given other cities of the time. Mormons often try to say that the charter gave them rights to supersede Illinois law as a justification for the practice of polygamy - except the Nauvoo council never made polygamy legal.
My review is that the article is pretty general in nature, but there are red flags as with the above.
The Nauvoo Expositor was the newspaper voice of apostates determined to destroy the Prophet Joseph Smith and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the spring of 1844. During the last few months of Joseph Smith’s life, an opposition party of disgruntled members, apostates, and excommunicants coalesced into a dissenting church. The principals claimed to believe in the Book of Mormon and the restoration of the gospel, but rejected what they termed Nauvoo innovations, notably plural marriage. Claiming that Joseph was a fallen prophet, the dissenters set out, through the Expositor, to expose the Prophet’s supposed false teachings and abominations. They held secret meetings, made plans, and took oaths to topple the Church and kill Joseph Smith. The publication of the newspaper was crucial to their stratagem.
Con’t
http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/daily/history/1831_1844/nauvoo_expositor_eom.htm
Yep, references Apostle Oaks - but fails to note that Oaks called the destruction an illegal act - keep digging resty, even darkplanet cannot help you.
You stuff came from “Mormon Coffee” which you did not give the link.
I need to read the original source!
go to your library resty - the article is properly cited and i’m sure the librarian would be pleased to help you .
HAd he been caught in ADULTERY??
Why do you mentally deny known FACTS?
How STRONG is the influence of MORMONism that a rational person would DO such things?
A jury would probably say that is what she is doing.
HEY!!
THESE FOLKS?
They are OFFICIAL Mormon accounts!!!
The 'city council' was MORMONs!
Wake UP, Girl!
I'm sorry; but we BELIEVE something different.
--MormonDube(What good is a church if you can't clean the dirt from it?)
Have I been BANNED more than you?
Now: I can produce FREEPERS here who can hose their dirtiest pigs, and take offense at any truth they show that we wish would just GO AWAY!!. We can beat the world's doors down and STILL them ANTI's can reach more folks than that on FR!!
Do you even READ the stuff you post???
Nauvoo Expositor before Nauvoo City Council.
Monday, June 10, 1844.—I was in the City Council from 10 A.M., to 1:20 P.M., and from 2:20 P.M. to 6:30 P.M. investigating the merits of the Nauvoo Expositor, and also the conduct of the Laws, Higbees, Fosters, and others, who have formed a conspiracy for the purpose of destroying my life, and scattering the Saints or driving them from the state.
An ordinance was passed concerning libels. The Council passed an ordinance declaring the Nauvoo Expositor a nuisance, and also issued an order to me to abate the said nuisance. I immediately ordered the Marshal to destroy it without delay, and at the same time issued an order to Jonathan Dunham, acting Major-General of the Nauvoo Legion, to assist the Marshal with the Legion, if called upon so to do.
But he's DEAD now so what he said no longer matters.
--MormonBube(and that's is how it is.)
Good morning Elsie
:)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.