.png)
Today in Thutopia I am hosting Everyday Mormon Writer's new contest. In case you've missed previous mention of EMW, it's an online zine bringing bitesize (single-sitting-size) portions of fiction, poetry, and nonfiction. They are currently presenting the twelve finalists of their Four Centuries of Mormon Stories contest, with the discussions distributed across the bloggernacle (which I find a grand gesture of togetherness).
The conceit of the contest is simple: three stories for every century of Mormon history---the 19th, the 20th, the 21st, the 22nd. If you've been playing along at home, so far we've read the 19th century and, including today, two of three for the 20th century. Join the fun and next week you can join us in the present and the future!
Today's 20th-century story is “When the Bishop Started Killing Dogs” by Steven Peck. I'm a great Peck fan, starting with his science writing. He's released two books recently which have received much love: A Short Stay in Hell (which I recommend) and A Scholar of Moab (which I intend to read soon). He's also the author of a terrific story about the Church of Jesus Christ of Martian Saints. Pick up Monsters & Mormons to read that one.
“When the Bishop Started Killing Dogs”
by Steven Peck
It’s funny what makes a man go crazy but one thing is sure no one expects it to be the Ward Bishop. It was Sunday morning and I noticed the police cars down the street at the Mullers’. Liz and I ran over to see what was going on. In our town when you see a police car at a neighbor’s yard you zip over because you know who it is that lives there. Plus we are all in the same Ward. When we got there it was plain to see what had happened. On their front lawn was their dog dead and with an arrow stuck in its chest. The officer was pulling it out and we could all see that it had a target tip and not a hunting tip and I think we were all a little surprised. It popped into our heads that this must have been teenagers because who else would have used a target tip when you want to take something down? The Muller kids were all crying and Sister Muller was crying too but she was . . . . read the rest then return
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Well! Wasn't that fun!
Let's get the discussion going. To start things off, may I suggest some topics for your consideration?
The 20th century is a long time. About a hundred years if I recollect correctly. When do you place this story? How can you tell?
The story reveals its big surprise right in the title. But this evil Atticus tale is saving its true surprise for the end. How seriously do you take the new bishop's thinking?
In some ways, the violence seems to draw the community together. Will the source of the violence negate that effect? Are we able to empathize with our leaders as we expect them to empathize with us?
=
Thmazing's Thutopia is the blog home of Eric W Jepson, aka Theric, Th., Theudonymous, Thashionista, thetcetera. To read more thmusings about the Mormon arts, Mormon sex, things to read, svithes, whatever, feel free to click around. Either way, it was lovely having you here today. See you aroudn the Bloggernacle.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI love the ending. Fun story. Good description, I could almost hear that poor wounded dog.....thanks:/
ReplyDeletemelody
.
DeleteI had a visceral reaction to the pulling out of that first arrow. So I know just what you mean.
I've read the free online sample of The Scholar of Moab, so I came to this little piece expecting a world of quirky and sure enough didn't I find it and all. As for the date--hard to tell. The narrator sounds like he works from the back of a horse and the tale has a desert punk feel to it, but 4X4s and a bow in every bedroom make me think it must be at least the 80s.
ReplyDelete.
DeleteTo me, it felt very 60s, but you're right that the 4x4s kind of make that unlikely.
An equally good question is WHERE. Obviously it's a very Mormon town, and when I imagine a small one-ward town in south-eastern Idaho a few miles from a small couple-stakes town, I begin to feel like I know the place a bit better and that it need not be so long ago as the 60s.
I can easily see the narrator as an Idahoan or maybe a guy from Spanish Fork. For some reason, everyone I've ever known from Spanish Fork talks like that. And if we're going to let it be a small town like that I could easily see it being the 80s or 90s.
DeleteI would have assumed 2nd half 20th century, also, but I can't tell you why. (Maybe because I'm also 2nd half 20th century...)
ReplyDeleteThe consistency of voice in this story was really impressive to me, and was what held the story together for me.
And, Eric, you're right: the end was a surprise for me, too. A great (as in good, no so much big) one.
I appreciate that the bishop is human (well, both bishops, I guess). I remember my Father-in-law's being very concerned when I portrayed a bishop with failings in a play I wrote years ago. But I was thrilled to have the narrator remind us: "even though besides killing the dogs he had been mostly a fine bishop."
.
DeleteWhen my mind wanders and I imagine being a bishop, I think about my bibliography and wonder how much crap a congregation is willing to put up with . . . .
I came across this today, which I share without judgment:
Deletehttp://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2019468677_bishop19.html
I agree--the end is a good surprise. What's interesting to me is that most people would take this concept and the mystery would be who is killing the dogs. Instead, we know that answer from the title and the first lines, and it's the storyteller's voice that creates the sense of mystery, that there's something else to discover. It reminds me of Gabriel Garcia Marquez' Chronicle of a Death Foretold--the real mystery is what we can discover about the community, as well as who the narrator really is/his role.
DeleteMostly fine is pretty good.
Delete.
ReplyDelete[Edit: The URL of the story changed, so I updated it in the post. Sorry for the dead link earlier.]
"But I was thrilled to have the narrator remind us: 'even though besides killing the dogs he had been mostly a fine bishop.'"
ReplyDeleteYep. Loved that line.
Also, I'm really happy with the way the discussions have been spread over the 'nacle. It's fun getting to visit (or revisit) a new venue every day.
.
DeleteI've discovered some sites I had not known before. Which I think is great. Smaller blogs are getting more insular, and this helps break us out of our insularity.
Encountering new sites is good. But I think the discussion would be more probing and intense if it were all concentrated in one handy location in collapsible threaded forum format (as opposed to blog format). It would certainly reduce checkback time--and so increase participation and interaction.
Delete.
DeleteThis is probably true. Good and bad are part of every decision. When EdMW started, I thought not having discussion on the site itself was terrible. I still see those downsides, but I've since seen all the upsides I suppose the Goldbergs were prioritizing from the start.
Oh man, that was equal parts hilarious and gruesome. I felt bad for laughing.
ReplyDeleteThat was my thought exactly. Steven Peck is a Mormon literary treasure. I need to gift myself a copy of The Scholar of Moab for Christmas.
DeleteI liked it! Wickedly good! We are so inhibited in Mormon culture, it felt good for a bishop to solve a problem without inhibition. Decisive clear action to solve a problem with his own two hands - something a leader is rarely able to do. A bishop has so much responsibility and then people call him for the dumbest things, or things completely out of his realm of responsibility. I see those as the yippy dog problems. Many a bishop has probably wanted to put a yippy ward member out of their misery, and thus end his own.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that now I'm hoping for a similar catharsis in my life. I'll have to be content to read this story several times and look up Peck's other stories.
I'm not sure I should weigh in, but I wanted to say thanks for the kind words! It was a fun story to write.
ReplyDeleteYou certainly should weigh in. For one thing, you can clear up the question of date.
DeleteI enjoyed the story overall, but the improper grammar (which I figured out was probably intentional) really bothered me at first. The most annoying thing to me, however, was the use of the "D-word" two times. Was that really necessary? I thought part of the point of this contest was to show that we don't need that kind of stuff to have this kind of story. Call me a "Molly" if you want, but I prefer not to hear or read any kind of bad language, and that word falls under that category.
ReplyDeleteI also really liked the ending, as others have mentioned, and the story made me laugh. Thanks! :-)
I enjoyed the story overall, but the improper grammar (which I figured out was probably intentional) really bothered me at first. The most annoying thing to me, however, was the use of the "D-word" two times. Was that really necessary? I thought part of the point of this contest was to show that we don't need that kind of stuff to have this kind of story. Call me a "Molly" if you want, but I prefer not to hear or read any kind of bad language, and that word falls under that category.
ReplyDeleteI also really liked the ending, as others have mentioned, and the story made me laugh. Thanks! :-)
This piece is oddly relevant to my life. I have two barking beagle/pug mixes and there are a couple of stray dogs running around our (Idaho) town where everyone talks like the dialog in this story, and the police recently put a live trap on our property to catch the strays. They caught one and shot it at the dump. It was the local chief of police, though, not the bishop. In this town, people might not see a dog-killing bishop as a bad thing.
ReplyDelete.
DeleteOr at least not as bad as the folk here in Berkeley would feel.
They should have just called Steve.
DeleteThanks everyone!
ReplyDeleteI pictured this in the late 70s, but as Sarah points out this could be now.
Anonymous, actually I think Theric's story captures nicely this tension between depicting the saints like we think they should be (Anderson) or like they are (Whipple). I'm fully in the the Whipple camp as you can see. If the rural community would have sworn, they swear in the story.
Was the bad grammer intensional? You never know with me.
For the record, Anderson used "damn" in a few novels. Once after a fist fight.
Delete.
DeleteI was just reading the intro to an anniversary edition of Up the Down Staircase and I was fascinated by how language mores have changed in just the last forty+ years. Did you know a*s used to be vastly more acceptable that p***k? Because that's not the way I was raised. And the book wasn't even a deacon when I was born!
[Self promotion: Theric's story as mentioned by Steve above.]
Having spent my childhood in a Southern Idaho farming ward in the 70's, I can vouch for the language, culture, and behavior in Steve's story as absolutely authentic. :) The bishop's second counselor in a neighboring ward even got a DUI and wasn't released. When I go back and visit, I note that very little has changed, except some folks have iPhones now.
DeleteI love how the narrator is so matter-of-fact and how he avoids ruminating about the causes and leaves that work up to us readers. And I love how it shows the oddities (great and small) among a close-knit community. Over time, we all get to know our neighbors (or your fellow ward members or for Mormon-saturated communities these are the same people) and their eccentricities, weaknesses, dysfunctions. I love that the story follows the advice, "Show don't tell." Well done.
ReplyDelete.
DeleteI think that's part of what I like about this story---it's honest sense of a real community.