Comments on: Citations Exhibiting the Most Prominent Reading…

By: Kent Larsen

Kent Larsen — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 03:36:41 +0000

I hope to. I’ve even done a little work going back to previous conferences.

Thanks for reminding me to work on it.

By: Th.

Th. — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 03:27:11 +0000

Kent—

Will you be doing this again?

By: amylouwho

amylouwho — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 22:50:22 +0000

I was so happy when The Little Prince was quoted. It is such a great piece of literature/philosophical writing. In fact we used to use it on my mission (in France) to help members understand the importance of creating true friendships in order to share the Gospel. Makes me feel like we were on the right track.

By: Stephen M (Ethesis)

Stephen M (Ethesis) — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:13:51 +0000

Thanks for the summary, I’m off to read some new books ;)

By: Th.

Th. — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:00:30 +0000

I can’t believe even Eugene Woodbury and Harold Bloom would steal my ideas.

Honestly though, the idea doesn’t require a huge leap. If Joseph Smith had a) not founded a religion and b) actually written things down himself, then he would no doubt be read today outside Mormondom much more widely than he is.

By: Eugene Woodbury

Eugene Woodbury — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 20:52:26 +0000

In this essay, I call Joseph Smith a "19th century transcendentalist who belongs alongside Emerson and Thoreau." Henley's "Invictus" gets a mention in chapter 25 of Angel Falling Softly.

By: Laura Craner

Laura Craner — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 20:07:32 +0000

Oh, sorry one more p.s. But this is entertaining. In “The American Religion” and his chapter on “Mormonism” Bloom says something to the effect of the Book of Mormon being quite dull and the Doctrine and Covenants being gripping. Also, he said that under the leadership of prophets like ETB, HWH, and GBH, the church would be stymied. It would only be under the leadership of Thomas S. Monson (who was so much younger than the others) that the Church would pick up speed again! I guess some literary critics just don’t get it. *wink*

By: Laura Craner

Laura Craner — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 20:04:08 +0000

Oh, and, p.s.–President Monson really resonated with me this time too.

By: Laura Craner

Laura Craner — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 20:03:32 +0000

Th-
I think Harold Bloom mentions *your* ideas in his book “The American Religion”. Maybe it’s a stretch (Bradley will probably disagree with me) but a lot of Mormon ideas and rhetoric seemed steeped in transcendentalism–especially when you factor in its modern incarnations. I also don’t think it’s any surprise, given that Joseph Smith and Emerson and Thoreau and Whitman were all kicking around at the same time. . .

By: Kent Larsen

Kent Larsen — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 14:56:09 +0000

William (8) wrote:

I haven’t been a huge fan of his style over the years (although loving his personality and service and enjoying many of his stories), but the way he moved from carpe diem to gratitude really touched me and taught me just now.

BCC’s open conference thread pointed out one of Pres. Monson’s unusual speech patterns–the {noun} was/were {verb}, as in:

tears were shed
hearts were mended

Despite some criticism on the BCC thread, I kind of like the construction. While in the passive voice, it isn’t a grammatical error as someone claimed on the thread.

In fact, its such an unusual construction that I think it adds to his talks. It gives a wonderful break to the narrative, one that emphasizes the critical moment in the story. I think it works very well.