No sex this week

.

After months of exploring sexuality in LDS literature (note my use of the term LDS), I think I'm finally done and so there will be no new eros post on Thmusings this week.

It's kind of relieving, frankly.

A word to the wise

.

Shaddap!

Who's got the goiter now, Herman?

.

Huh, Herman? Huh? Huh? Huh?

Svithing the difference between direct and indirect objects

.

Here's something.

I don't know about you, but I associate Hymn #19, "We Thank Thee, O God, for a Prophet," with the prophet. What with it having become traditional to "spontaneously" stand and sing it when one walks in the room. We stand and sing "We thank thee, O God, for a prophet / To guide us in these latter days."

But since I associate singing this song at prophets, lines like this confuse me:

We thank thee for every blessing
Bestowed by thy bounteous hand.

We’ll sing of his goodness and mercy.
We’ll praise him by day and by night,
Rejoice in his glorious gospel,
And bask in its life-giving light.

These aren't the sort of things one sings to a human being.

The fact is, the vast majority of this song is only barely connected to prophets. It's a song of praise to God. Thanks, God, for that prophet and all the other cool stuff you give us. That sort of thing. It's not a song to the prophet or praising the prophet. It's thanks for the prophet.

And all the other cool stuff we've been given.

Like the gospel.

And it's life-giving light.

We thank thee, o God, for a prophet.

last week's svithe

Thidentity

.

Lady Steed just found this bmp on her mother's computer. Imagine how you would think of me differently had I selected a different image!

Just imagine!

My feet are cold

.

which turns my belly to jelly.

I swear nothing makes sense.

The Erotic in LDS Lit Part IX: What I heard in General Conference

.

If you fear, fear not. If you fear not, fear.
---J. Reuben Clark

.

A couple of the talks from our most recent General Conference struck me as relevant to our discussion here, and a fitting way to end things. I was going to put my comments in rollover text, but that would have prevented linkage, so instead I did the footnote method, which I'm not a big fan of, but we'll give it a try.

Elaine S. Dalton : A Return to Virtue

....

Virtue is a prerequisite to entering the Lord’s holy temples and to receiving the Spirit’s guidance. Virtue “is a pattern of thought and behavior based on high moral standards.” It encompasses chastity and moral purity. Virtue begins in the heart and in the mind. It is nurtured in the home. It is the accumulation of thousands of small decisions and actions. Virtue is a word we don’t hear often in today’s society, but the Latin root word virtus means strength. Virtuous women and men possess a quiet dignity and inner strength. They are confident because they are worthy to receive and be guided by the Holy Ghost.¹ President Monson has counseled: “You be the one to make a stand for right, even if you stand alone. Have the moral courage to be a light for others to follow.² There is no friendship more valuable than your own clear conscience, your own moral cleanliness — and what a glorious feeling it is to know that you stand in your appointed place clean and with the confidence that you are worthy to do so.”

Could it be that we have been slowly desensitized into thinking that high moral standards are old-fashioned and not relevant or important in today’s society?³ As Elder Hales has just reminded us, Lehonti in the Book of Mormon was well positioned on the top of a mountain. He and those he led were “fixed in their minds with a determined resolution” that they would not come down from the mount. It only took the deceitful Amalickiah four tries, each one more bold than the previous, to get Lehonti to “come down off from the mount.” And then having embraced Amalickiah’s false promises, Lehonti was “poison[ed] by degrees” until he died. Not just poisoned, but “by degrees.” Could it be that this may be happening today? Could it be that first we tolerate, then accept, and eventually embrace the vice that surrounds us? Could it be that we have been deceived by false role models and persuasive media messages that cause us to forget our divine identity? Are we too being poisoned by degrees?⁴ . . . What could be more deceptive than to entice men — young and old, holding the holy priesthood of God — to view seductive pornography and thus focus on flesh instead of faith, to be consumers of vice rather than guardians of virtue?⁵ The Book of Mormon relates the story of 2,000 young heroes whose virtue and purity gave them the strength to defend their parents’ covenants and their family’s faith. Their virtue and commitment to be “true at all times” changed the world!

I truly believe that one virtuous young woman or young man, led by the Spirit, can change the world, but in order to do so, we must return to virtue. We must engage in strict training. As the marathon runner Juma Ikanga said after winning the New York Marathon, “The will to win is nothing without the will to prepare.” Now is the time to prepare by exercising more self-discipline.⁶ Now is the time to become “more fit for the kingdom.” Now is the time to set our course and focus on the finish. A return to virtue must begin individually in our hearts and in our homes.

What can each of us do to begin our return to virtue? The course and the training program will be unique to each of us.⁷ I have derived my personal training program from instructions found in the scriptures: “Let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly.” “Cleave unto [your] covenants.” “Stand . . . in holy places.” “Lay aside the things of [the] world.” “Believe that ye must repent.” “Always remember him and keep his commandments.” And “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, . . . seek after these things.” Now more than ever before, it is time to respond to Moroni’s call to “awake, and arise” and to “lay hold upon every good gift, and touch not the evil gift, nor the unclean thing.”⁸

....

Richard G. Scott : Honor the Priesthood and Use It Well

....

As we share these moments together, I ask you to ponder your personal worthiness to use the sacred authority you hold. I will also ask you to consider how consistently you use your priesthood to bless others. My intent is not to criticize but to help increase the benefits that flow from your use of the priesthood.

Are your private, personal thoughts conducive to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, or would they benefit from a thorough housecleaning?⁹ Do you nourish your mind with elevating material, or have you succumbed to the enticement of pornographic literature or Web sites? . . . Are you most careful to control what enters your mind through your eyes and ears to ensure that it is wholesome and elevating?¹⁰

....

If you are married, are you faithful to your wife mentally as well as physically? Are you loyal to your marriage covenants by never engaging in conversation with another woman that you wouldn’t want your wife to overhear?¹¹

....

If any of you feel uncomfortable with any of the answers you have mentally given to the questions I have asked, take corrective action now. If there are worthiness issues, with all of the tenderness of my heart I encourage you to speak to your bishop or a member of your stake presidency now. You need help. Those matters that trouble you will not heal themselves. Without attention they will likely get worse. It may be difficult for you to speak to your priesthood leader, but I encourage you to do it now for your own good and for the benefit of those who love you.¹²

Thericonian Commentary

1. I hope this is the real issue for us: whether in all our parsing we are insistent that we remain worthy of the Holy Ghost. For what shall it profit us, if we shall gain the whole world--even a really sexy one---yet lose our own souls?

(return)


2. This can be interpreted in more than one way. Being the teller of full truths as our early scholars in parts one and two talked of; being the hiders from facts that some would argue for. But of course she wasn't talking about this series when she made the quote.

(return)


3. It is extremely possible. But it's also possible that we are finally ready to honestly examine some things we've been avoiding. Sometimes one will be true, sometimes the other. Examine thine own heart, et cetera.

(return)


4. And here's the poison metaphor again! which, as you will recall from Part II, Jorgensen rejects as an "overextended or overcredited metaphor. Yes, pornography is dangerous, as [is] poison . . . . But reading is an act of consciousness, a work of the spirit, a free act of a free agent; its consequences are not deterministically predicable . . . . This line of thinking might help explain Jesus' startling declaration that 'there is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him' . . . . His point seems to be that because we are free agents, nothing can defile us but what comes 'from within, out of the heart'."

I think I feel less strongly about this than he does, but I do think we need to come at the metaphor critically. It's a useful metaphor, but it's still just a metaphor.

(return)


5. No real comment on this other than to say that I hope no one will use anything I have written as justification for doing what they know to be evil. But, if you do, don't blame me. I might be guilty of many things, but ultimately the choice to do wrong was yours, no matter your excuse, and the charge won't stick come Judgment Day.

So nyaah.

(return)


6. This seems as good a time as any to mention something that's never quite fit before, viz. Are there books Theric has walked away from?

Yes.

Off the top of my head, Gore Vidal's Myra Breckinridge, Gilbert Hernandez's Book Of Ofelia, and Anne Rice'sSleeping Beauty.

Don't recommend any of them.

(return)


7. I agree wholeheartedly. And her personal plan is a pretty good place for any of us to start.

(return)


8. The complicated thing is that I think we can all rally wholeheartedly behind these two scriptures, but we all define the terms in slightly different ways. And what I think we need to do is trust each other's judgment a little more.

For all I know, Myra Breckinridge reintroduced you to God. Who am I to judge?

(return)


9. Yes! Another metaphor!

And I quite like this one. Cleaning house. Nice image. We could write a whole post on it! But I won't I'm done. This started as one lonely post after all. And nine is a much bigger number than one.

Sheesh.

(return)


10. Are you? I'm in favor of dealing with the sexual aspects of life in literature, but never have I argued for the opposite of "wholesome and elevating"; quite the opposite in fact. Finding the intersection of these two shouldn't be hard. In fact, as I understand our doctrine, the intersection must be quite large. And it's unexplored territory, a beautiful frontier.

(return)


11. The conversation thing was something I had never thought about and led to some introspection. But the issue of mental adultery is something we've talked about in length. And, as suspected, apostles are against it.

I knew it!

(return)


12. If any of you feel uncomfortable with any of the answers you have mentally given to the questions I have asked, take corrective action now.

For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves.

Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness; For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their reward.

So let it be done.

(return)

Now that things are coming to an end in this series, let me just say that it's a beautiful world (as a whole) we've been given and there is much of beauty left to be uncovered in our literature. Let's go, seek, find, share.

The Erotic in LDS Lit
Part I: Why?
Part II: Jorgensen's Take
Part III: Test Case
Part III.V: Breaking down the controversy over Angel Falling Softly
Part IV: The Sex Talk
Part V: Can there be a “Moral Pornography”?
Part VII: Theric replies to your questions and comments (a)
Part VII: Theric replies to your questions and comments (b)
Part VIII: Theric replies to your questions and comments (c)

Money is stupid

.

When will we have a monetary system that isn't run on emotion? A system where the feelings of traders and bankers and consumers wildly affect our financial security?

Short answer: never.

Money is just an imaginary construct anyway. What makes us think that something we've collectively agreed to believe in will ever be free from the whims of our chemical brains?

We choose to believe in money. So when our faith gets weak, of course our money gets week. How could it not?

But what other system is possible?

Vote Yes on Prop 11!

.

It's not even worth getting into whether or not this particular solution to the problem is the best possible solution to the problem. It's a solution to the problem.

I don't want to go into my feelings on the subject just now, but one of my favorite columnists once wrote a bit on this when similar measures were up for vote a few years ago. I'm going to feel free to steal that column and just post it here:

All in favor of democracy say 'aye' I go to the polls every time the chance arises, but I didn't vote last time in the House race. Why? Because when there is only one person on the ballot, I leave it blank in protest. Representational democracy does not mean that I get to choose between Bill Thomas and nobody. Representational democracy means I get to choose between Bill Thomas and somebody. And that somebody has to have a snowball's chance of winning. In the November 2004 election, Bill Thomas (our representative in the House) ran unopposed; Roy Ashburn (our state senator) ran unopposed when he was last up in 2002. Thomas recently told Bakersfield College's student paper, "I believe incumbents ought to have opponents so people can make choices between candidates. That's what elections are supposed to be about." Right. Like our assemblyman, Kevin McCarthy, who was reelected with 78.7 percent of the vote last November. He's one of 16 assemblymembers to be sent to Sacramento with at least 50 percent more of the vote than their nearest opponent. And 66 of the 80 assembly seats were won by at least a 20 percent margin — not including the guy who ran unopposed. Frankly, it's a racket, a scam, a hoax being pulled on us voters. Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe said it just right: "The deepest and unhealthiest divide in American politics is not the one that separates Republicans from Democrats or conservatives from liberals. It is the gulf between Insiders and Outsiders — between the incumbents who treat public office as private property and the increasingly neutered electorate in whose name they claim to act. ... many legislators regard their positions as lifetime entitlements that voters must not be allowed to tamper with." Well, it's time to tamper. I've talked to both Ashburn and McCarthy about nonlegislative redistricting and both say it's a fine idea: Rah, rah, electorate! and so forth. But which redistricting plan is best? The plan endorsed by the governor is dismissed by Ashburn. He calls it's primary advocate, Ted Costa, a gadfly and says that picking judges to redistrict won't be an improvement because judges are every bit as partisan as the legislature. His preferred plan has judges submit the names of citizens, and from that pool, elected politicians would choose the redistricters. Let me say that again. We don't want legislators to choose the redistricting panel because, in Ashburn's words, "political people will always act in their own self-interest." We don't want judges to do it either because they're just as bad. So we'll have those bad judges pick people to be decided on by the politicos we're trying to oust from the process in the first place. Uh huh. Ashburn has other problems with Costa's plan that I might agree with, but here's one element I do like: Schwarzenegger wrote a letter to the Committee for an Independent Voice that said, "Among the five special counsels (the people on the proposed redistricting panel), no more than two can be from one political party. This measure guarantees that at least one of the special counsels is not registered with either of the two major parties." Now that I like. After all, both major parties are ridiculous posturers that primarily exist to self-perpetuate. I must not be alone in this opinion. According to CIV, "91 percent of the growth in the California electorate in the last ten years has been voters registering outside the two major parties." Why? Because Republicans are about Republicans and Democrats are about Democrats and they're both about power and maintaining it, even if that means scratching each other's backs. Currently, in addition to the gadfly's plan, there are seven other redistricting plans hanging outside supermarkets for the 598,105 signatures they need to get on the ballot. I'm sure if we look close, we'll find that each has its weaknesses — most employ corrupt, partisan judges, for instance — but let me promise you this: I'll vote yea on every redistricting measure that ends up on my ballot. Anything's better than the system we've got now. Representational democracy, for instance. Copyrighted © 2005 Tehachapi News All Rights Reserved

And when we're done with this, we can get on the Electoral College fix.

The Big O's part in today's Primary program (a svithe)

.

last week's svithetacular

I'm glad it's not April 1

.

If it were, I would swear that Google Goggles is a joke---and an excellent one.

But because it isn't April 1, I know it's real. And I think it's just awesome.

Being a teetotaler myself, I don't think I'll be enabling this, but still: it's freaking awesome.

The Erotic in LDS Lit Part VIII: Theric replies to your questions and comments (c)

.

I intended this to be the final week, but some things came up in conference that deserve mention. If the talks are up early enough, the final part will appear next Wednesday as regularly scheduled.

.

If you fear, fear not. If you fear not, fear.
---J. Reuben Clark

Adam: You know, this is really interesting to me because I have the same problem with adolescent ultra-prudery that you describe. And yet, the first time I tried to seriously write after being married, I felt that I could not express the truth I felt about certain characters without writing about their sexual relationship.

It was only one sentence and it was not explicit in any way, but it was openly about sex, and it seemed right when nothing else did.

I don't have a lot to say in reply to this; I mostly count it as an amen to my basic argument that sex is a part of life and art is about life. To quote Levi Peterson again, "Ultimately [literature] should reflect all life. Nothing that people feel, nothing that they do, should be denied a place in literature."

That's the way I feel.

Adam: I've only seen one film ever, for example, in which I found a sex scene neither offensive nor unnecessary. . . .

I should point out that I have seen films with suggestive content that I found acceptable and even enlightening in context . . . but . . . only one with an actual sex scene that I thought added to the beauty of the film.

I've been trying to think of movies in which I can say the same, but nothing comes immediately to mind. Alas, but I haven't been watching many movies the last few years, and specific instances are lacking.

That said, I do yet have a feeling of understanding the holiness of appropriate sexuality between good people as experienced through film. I wish I could be more specific.

Can I use this as an excuse to watch more movies?

Adam: I also want to say that after reading your series thus far I took some time to read your The Widower. It so elegantly evoked my feelings for my own good wife that I was nearly brought to tears. Thank you for using your gifts for good instead of evil.

Everytime I read this, it warms my heart. Thanks again for the compliment, Adam.

Schmett: Perhaps you married folks can help me out here, but I cannot reconcile within myself the dramatic dichotomy in the Church regarding "adult" things. I mean, sex seems a really tense subject because, unlike most thou-shalt-nots, even though it'd get me excommunicated right now, the days will come when I won't be fully living my faith without it. But it seems ridiculous to me that it should be such a frightening and taboo subject because Temple covenants are the exact same way! I mean, I remember growing up, Mom and Dad would go to the temple fairly regularly, and even though I had no idea what they did there and that I couldn't go do the things they were doing, I understood that one day I would be able to, and I eagerly looked forward to getting my endowment all of my growing-up years. How is it, then, that sex is so horrifying?

I'm going to pretend the word "horrifying" was something less, um, horrific, but otherwise I think this deserves more reflection on our part.

Although I agree with Foxy and RC that the way the church teaches about sex is mostly okay, there can be no doubt that there is a difference in looking forward to sex and looking forward to ordinances.

But really, the differences are stark. Sex is available half-drunk under the bleachers, for instance. Sex is widely present. Sex is on billboards and in your spam. When was the last time you had an equivalent illicit offer for ordinances? I'm going to guess the answer is pretty close to never.

And that's the difference. It takes more vigilance and effort to stay sexually inexperienced, mentally or physically. Avoiding unholy thoughts about the temple is much easier.

There ain't no templtosterone to fight against. So feeling of weakness and failure are less likely to come as regards ordinances. Ergo, sex is more likely to be looked upon with frustration and self-loathing.

But it doesn't have to be so.

And I think in most cases, openness (of an appropriate sort) between parents and child will help.

Eugene: . . . especially for teenage boys, everything arouses sexual feelings.

Exactly.

To swing this more in the direction it was originally intended, what about stuff I keep around my house? Are there some books I should keep locked up in my bedroom? And where do I start?

All I can say is thank goodness Sears discontinued their catalogue.

Now if only there wasn't that sexy just-baptized chick in the Book of Mormon --- remember her? And forget pictures, what about the train of thoughts that can lead from the harlot Isabel? And what if a kid cracks the Bible?

In the end, teach correct principles. They'll learn to govern themselves. Eventually.

Recession Cone: We don't talk a lot about sex during church for several very good reasons.

#1: The church sees sex as a very private and sacred expression of unity between married people. One of the ways we keep things sacred is not to discuss them excessively (e.g.: Heavenly Mother, Temple Rituals).

#2: The more one thinks about sex outside of marriage, the harder it is to maintain virtue. Sexual thoughts are arousing - there's a positive feedback loop here. There's little purpose in talking up how great sex is to a group of adolescents that aren't supposed to be having it. Mentions of sex at church that I remember from my pre-married phase were very appropriate: sex was placed in context as a gift from God, but we didn't dwell on how mind-blowingly wonderful it is. This seems like the right approach to me.

#3: The church has to respect diversity of opinion. Sex is a very delicate subject. It can easily divide a ward (e.g. "Is oral sex ok between married people?"). The church has to very carefully decide what issues to discuss, so as not to place stumbling-blocks in each other's way. It's best to leave some subjects implicit.

#1: I don't disagree. Well said.

#2: "Positive feedback loop" --- funny choice of words.

But you're right: talking about sex (in any way) leads to thinking about sex, leads to feeling, um, sexy, I guess, et cetera. It builds on itself. Which is part of the reason chastity lessons can get uncomfortable --- especially to adolescents who haven't yet figured out things like what's-what and control thereof.

On the other hand, ignoring things won't help. Balance. The every tricky thing called balance.

#3: I find this the most compelling reason.

I had a BYU professor --- single woman in her late forties --- and one day she went on a sudden rant about a bridal shower she had been to. Someone had given the bride some edible panties. ! The professor went on and on about how evil this was and how out of touch with prophetic guidelines and Church policy and how when she gets married she certainly won't allow that kind of debauchery into her sacredest of relationships. Et cetera.

I think not talking about such things is just better for everyone.

So yeah. Although I don't think it needs to be official policy (that would require talking about it), at the very least I think it is very very weird to host passion parties with the ladies at church.

Celia: In Elder Holland's talk/book Of Souls, Symbols, and Sacraments, he opens with "The topic of human intimacy is as sacred as any I know. In discussing it, the subject can quickly slide from the sacred into the merely sensational. It would be better not to address the topic at all than to damage it with casualness or carelessness."

Which is why it took me so long to start this series after the initial request. I don't know how well I've succeeded at avoided sliding into the "merely sensational." I would appreciate feedback on this point.

Eugene: A rollercoaster has no socially redeeming value. And they've been known to kill people.

This is probably the most interesting comparison to porn this series produced.

And thought provoking.

In no small measure because I love roller coasters.

Eugene: In any case, hypotheticals notwithstanding, without concrete reference points . . . the resulting discussions will turn into attempts to guess what's in somebody else's head when the word "porn" is mentioned.

And because no one should feel compelled to read, watch or do something for purposes of argument or to be "cool" or whatever, the discussion becomes abstracted to the point of pointlessness.

Good point. Next time I do this, I'm giving everyone some pornographic homework.

Eugene: Unless we are to use explicitness itself as the final measure (which I reject, with caveats), then I think it would be better to define "meaningfulness" in terms of the moral intent of the artist.

Perhaps. At least in terms of defining something as "pornography." But in terms of defining what makes a "pornographic experience" for the consumer, the artist's moral intent likely has very little bearing.

From Part II: Jorgensen decides that in order for us to have a "pornographic event", we need "three elements: a porn author, a porn text, and a porn reader. In fact, it seems to me that the porn event seldom requires all three, though it always requires one: just a porn reader. Porn author and porn text make the event more likely but do not inevitably guarantee it."

(Which reminds me --- I didn't listen to the whole thing, but on City Art's and Lectures last night, Slavoj Žižek spoke on what might be termed a polite pronography. Sort of.)

Eugene: The beauty of the human form is a moral good . . . . Perhaps that is the test I would apply: Can beauty be found there?

Again, I like this thought a lot.

And in the end, we are judged for ourselves and our own intents. Back to what's in my house, we have a nice book of Waterhouse whose work by any standard is beautiful, but which can, for the viewer, easily slip into sexual territory fairly labeled pornographic.

So. Do I hide this book from my children? Do I hide it from them while they are between the ages of ten and twenty-one? Do I burn it on City Hall steps? Do I send it to school with them to show their friends?

I sometimes envy people who will close the doors on these questions by labeling 80% of the world evil.

But they're kidding themselves if they think that rejecting God-given beauties makes them holy.

Chosha: . . . it doesn't sound like porn. It sounds like arthouse.

Now there's a slippery slope! Is this about moral intent again? It it about artist exceptionality (which all us artists want to believe in because it makes us better than everyone else)? Is Shortbus not porn because it's indie? Is Larry Clark free of moral requirements because he's shown at Cannes?

The whole argument may only be semantics, but it makes me very, very nervous.

Chosha: I'll concede that the depiction of exploitation doesn't always equal porn (which wasn't really my original point, but I can see how it reads that way). Even so, there's definitely a line I don't think any filmmaker should cross in what they show on film, and calling it 'art' doesn't automatically render it okay. When the sex/nudity becomes gratuitious or too explicit, I think they've crossed the line into porn.

Where exactly that line should be drawn? Well now we're back to definitions...

I know, I know. Stupid definitions.

I think it's heartening that, no matter how much we quibble, as a whole we all seem to be on the same page. (This is an invitation for the disagreers to come out in force.)

Celia: The church teaches us that we ought to be modest in dress, action, and word so we don't deliberately arouse others (besides our spouse of course).

I think this is good advice to us all. Deliberately arousing others must surely be a sin. Incidentally arousing others is likely innocent.

But what about when we take an action which, although we don't intend it to arouse others, we know plain well will arouse them anyway? Are we off the hook then?

Celia: The second thing I get from that broad definition of porn is that it doesn't have to be naked women in magazines or in a film to be considered pornography.

People can be aroused by less. Now, I'm not saying that every time a person is aroused by something they see, read, or hear it is pornographic and necessary to repent. However, I believe that no matter the subject matter, if you continually dwell on and go back to something for the sake of arousal (even if it's a magazine with people modeling lingerie or a book like Between Husband and Wife), it is pornography and should be avoided.

In the end, I think the primary responsibility for pornography falls upon the end user. Sure, people making billions on others' addictions are responsible, but we are all responsible for ourselves. And if we want the hollyjollies, we can find them anywhere.

Those Disney Princesses are pretty hot.

Celia: I forgot to say that outside the traditional exploitative and blatant porn, there are some things that could be pornographic to some and not to others. We each have to really look at our hearts, thoughts, actions, and feelings and take responsibility for them.

So let it be written.

In a go, go, go world that sometimes seems to be an endless treadmill of deadlines and bill paying, we can often forget that we're fundamentally sensual beings.

This line comes from SF Weekly's latest Best of San Francisco issue. It's in the blurb for the City's best striptease lessons and the line stuck with me. When I happened across it again week's later and said "So that's where I read that," I knew it had a lot of truth.

Much like how the revelation that we are social creatures recreated my understanding of myself, I think it is also healthy to recognize we are sensual creatures. We are also spiritual creatures, yes, but to forget that our soul is flesh and spirit both is a mistake.

Speaking of sociality, last Sunday President Eyring taught us that joy is not something we find as individuals. We need each other. Sometimes on a macro level (eg, Church); sometimes on a micro level (eg, the bedroom).

We are complex and holy creatures, children of God who loves us.

Let us enjoy our blessings wisely.

18th Five Books Finished Here in 2008 (Austen, mysteries, manga, rock)

.

090) Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen, finished October 6

I like this book. Persuasion is better, but this one's quite good. If it were 80% its current length, it would be even better. And ditching the chapters-long epilogue wouldn't have hurt either.

Some of the characters are oppressively caricaturish (notably Mrs Bennett --- it's notable how much more rounded she is in film versions), but overall, this is an excellent book deserving of its two-hundred-years' praise.

But surely I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.

two or three weeks

089) The Colorado Kid by Stephen King, finished October 3

Friends, if you've been wanting to read Stephen King but have been put off by all those swears, have I got a book for you! The Colorado Kid has almost no swearing (and none of the heavyduty earblasters). In fact, this story isn't typical King at all. And, notwithstanding its pulp cred, it's not much of a pulp novel either. Take this (wonderfully pulpy) cover:



First, it never says Steff is drop-dead gorgeous anywhere. Just pretty. Second, she never has a tape recorder. And, if you could see the details, the newspaper headlines are wrong too.

Basically, the book consists entirely of two old Yankee geezers telling young Steffi the nonstory of the Colorado Kid.

I've read a few mysteries in my life, but this one (like the last one) is actually a mystery. Most mystery stories aren't mystery stories at all --- they're solution stories. And I'm sure that's what most people want from a 'mystery' story. Me too maybe. Usually. When I read them.

But I liked this mystery story. And I liked that it was a mystery.

And I like its cover. Wish I'd bought some other Hard Case novels for a dollar when I had a chance.

two days

088) Mr. White's Confession by Robert Clark, finished October 1

Except for a weird decoration atop the first pages of major sections, this book is a masterpiece of the paperback art --- who knew such a thing existed? But it's wonderful to touch and to look at and I've loved having it on my nightstand.

I got it from Picador to review and I'm happy to say that, unlike some other Early Reviewer books, this one I can openly recommend.

It reminds me (in good ways) of Paul Auster's perfect City of Glass. Similar questions posed in a mystery environment about memory and reliability and goodness and reality. It makes me want to jump right in to my new copy of the New York Trilogy or some other high-end pulpy mind massage.

(Off topic: as I was reading, the title character passed through Forks, Washington. So I told Lady Steed, who was lying next to me reading one of Stephanie Meyers's books. She looked over my shoulder and said, Hey La Push! Yes, Mr White goes there too.)

Mr White does not live in Washington. He's a Saint Paul boy with a faulty memory and the bad luck to get accused of murder.

This book does not read like most books in my acquaintance. It's not dead set on being either tragedy or comedy, and I'm still not sure which it really was. If you agree with Hugh Cook that any death spells the end of comedy, then comedy this ain't, because people most certainly die.

I hate to talk about this book in too much detail, because watching it unfold is fascinating and endlessly unexpected. And I don't mean unexpected in the gotcha sense, but rather, that this book doesn't feel scripted: it unfolds much like life itself and, like life, even what must be may not be. Life isn't big on sticking to a schedule.

Which is probably the best explanation as to why I can't determine if this is tragic or comic. Terrible things happen to bad people. And the results are awful. But, maybe, in the end, it was good for them? I don't know. I'm not sure. I can't say.

Sigh....

Wesley is hardnosed but human and to see him finally live . . . . And Maggie! How she - - - And how Ruby was taken just when - ! And that bastard We----.

I will find it hard not to love this book, even if we decide to call it a horrible and cruel tragedy.

I admit that I am partial to books with well-drawn characters, and these characters are exquisite.

Anyway.

My buddy Darin, veep of marketing at Picador, put a card in this book saying he would be happy to send a copy of Mr. White's Confession to any "friend or colleague . . . whom [I] would like [him] to send a copy of this book [to] in [my] name." So if you would like a copy of this book, give me your name and mailing address, and I'll email it along. The comments section is fine, or my email address is in the column to your left (unless you're one of those lazy reader-users), or you can contact me here. Getcher own! Discussion questions in the back!

a weekish

087) Concrete: Fragile Creature by Paul Chadwick, finished September 28

I started my Concrete journey over a year ago and only now found this volume, the first I ever knew of, at our library. It was nice to come to it, now that I know who Concrete is, and read another tale.

Concrete, like Madman and Hellboy, is a character who seems to meet the primary qualifications for "superhero" but, really, is actually merely a human being under peculiar circumstances.

In Concrete's case, he's been transfered into an alien body that makes him Thinglike --- he is massively heavy, incredibly strong, hard to hurt --- but it's not in him to take on all the world's evils. Instead he becomes a travel writer with the occasional oddjob to keep solvent.

In Fragile Creature he's working on a movie set.

In brief, Concrete is a wonderful character with good friends and a strange life.

And to have his humanity cut off from the world by being stuck in a rock case is, at times, heartbreaking.

Check your local library.



three hours, tops

086) Lone Wolf and Cub Vol. 1: The Assassin's Road by Kazuo Koike and Goseki Kojima, finished September 27

So I've been mangaing it up lately, with first volumes from Old Boy and The Drifting Classroom and now the wildly famous Lone Wolf and Cub, inspiration for Road to Perdition which I read a few years ago and, frankly, remember liking better.

Maybe it's not fair to judge a manga by its first volume, but there doesn't seem to be much to this one besides violence, violence and violence. Really violent violence. And dang sharp swords.

I would read more Old Boy if it were easy and more Drifting Classroom if it were close to easy, but, reputation or not, I just can't see much reason to pick up volume two of Lone Wolf no matter how easy (or free) to run down it may be.

The primary problem is, that in all this violence, the lead is never in risk of meeting his match. Put up against someone of any skill level--or any number of someones!--and he'll whupp 'em. Where's the story in that?

Frankly, I'm disappointed. The idea of a rogue samurai traveling with his three-year-old son and killing people is intriguing but, sadly, kinda boring.

I think more manga needs to be published in full-story size, like Ode to Kirihito. Granted, Lone Wolf is a series of short stories and not a serial novel (or something), but if Old Boy or Drifting Classroom were single-volumed, I would be much more likely to read manga. But reading first volumes that, alone, cannot be good enough to inspire the fanaticism required to run down the following seventeen (or seventy thousand) is never going to convert me.

(Sorry, Eugene.)



two days

Previously:

085) A Lion and a Lamb> by Rand H. Packer, finished September 20
084) What Jesus Meant by Garry Wills, finished September 20
083) The Lost Ones by Steve Niles et al, finished September 18
082) Dorian by Nephi Anderson, finished September 17
081) If You Want to Scare Yourself by Angela Sommer-Bodenburg, translated by Rene Vera Cafiero, with illustrations by Helga Spiess; finished September 12
080) Madman Gargantua by Mike Allred with Laura Allred, finished September 9
079) Star Wars by George Lucas, finished September 9
078) Angel Falling Softly by Eugene Woodbury, finished September 1
077) The Night Listener by Armistead Maupin finished August 29
076) Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, finished August 25
075) Added Upon by Nephi Anderson, finished August 24
074) The Last Flower by James Thurber, finished August 19
073) Reinventing Comics: How Imagination and Technology Are Revolutionizing an Art Form by Scott McCloud, finished August 17
072) The Trial of Colonel Sweeto and Other Stories by Nicholas Gurewitch, finished August 12
071) The Dreamer by Will Eisner, finished August 12
070) The Blot by Tom Neely, finished August 6
069) Strange Stories for Strange Kids edited by Art Spiegelman and Francoise Mouly, finished August 6
068) Survival Rates by Mary Clyde, finished July 30
067) A Week in October by Elizabeth Subercaseaux, translated by Marina Harss, finished July 29
066) Lehi in the Desert & The World of the Jaredites by Hugh Nibley, Ph. D., finished July 29
065) A Son Is Forever by various, finished July 29
064) Good ol' Snoopy by Charles M. Schultz, finished July 13
063) Embroideries by Marjane Satrapi, finished July 13
062) A Doré Treasury edited by James Stevens, finished July 12?
061) Slaughterhouse-Five or The Children's Crusade: A Duty-Dance with Death by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.; finished July 8
060) The Enoch Letters by Neal A. Maxwell, finished July
059) Sock Monkey: The Inches Incident by Tony Millionaire, finished July 3
058) The Number 73304-23-4153-6-96-8 by Thomas Ott, finished July 2
057) Chicken with Plums by Marjane Satrapi, finished July 1
056) 300 by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley, finished June 16
055) Fox Bunny Funny by Andy Hartzell, finished June 16
054) Where Did I Leave My Glasses?: The What, When, and Why of Normal Memory Loss by Martha Weinman Lear, finished June 15
053) The Mystery Guest by Grégoire Bouillier, trans. Lorin Stein, finished June 14
052) The Legend of Spud Murphy by Eoin Colfer, finished June 10
051) Good Bones and Simple Murders by Margaret Atwood, finished June 10
050) Created in Darkness by Troubled Americans: The Best of McSweeney's, Humor Category edited by D. Eggers, K. Shay, L. Epstein, J. Warner and S. Kleid, finished June 9
049) Bikeman by Thomas F. Flynn, finished June 5
048) Fool Moon by Jim Butcher, finished June 5
047) The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Selznick, finished June 2
046) Sixty Poems by Charles Simic, finished May 30
045) Replay by Ken Grimwood, finished May 28
044) The Age of the Conglomerates: A Novel of the Future by Thomas Nevins, finished May 27
043) W;t by Margaret Edson, finished April 19
042) Halo and Sprocket Volume 1: Welcome to Humanity by Kerry Cullen, finished May 17
041) Storm Front by Jim Butcher, finished May 16>
040) 20th Century Ghosts by Joe Hill, finished May 9
039) I Am the President of Ice Cream by Geoff Sebesta, finished May 4
038) On Chesil Beach by Ian McEwan, finished May 3
037) The Meaning of Everything: The Story of the Oxford English Dictionary by Simon Winchester, finished May Day
036) The Drifting Classroom Vol. 1 by Kazuo Umezu, finished April 30
035) The Complete Peanuts 1965 - 1966 by Charles M. Schulz, finished April 29
034) Nextwave: Agents Of H.A.T.E Volume 1: This Is What They Want by Warren Ellis et Stuart Immonen et al, finished April 29
033) Batman: Hush, Vol. 2 by Jeph Loeb et al, finished April 29
032) Batman: Hush, Vol. 1 by Jeph Loeb et al, finished April 28
031) Chéri by Colette, finished April 17
030) Wyrd Sisters by Terry Pratchett, finished April 13
029) Animal Farm by George Orwell, finished April 8
028) Macbeth by William Shakespeare, finished April 7
027) On the Road to Heaven by Coke Newell, finished April 4
026) The Great American Citizenship Quiz: Can You Pass Your Own Country's Citizenship Test? by Solomon M. Skolnick, finished March 23
025) Long After Dark by Todd Robert Petersen, finished March 23
024) The Lies of Locke Lamora by Scott Lynch, finished March 21
023) Robot Dreams by Sara Varon, finished March 10
022) The Complete Peanuts 1963-1964 by Charles M. Schulz, finished March 9
021) Spoon River Anthology by Edgar Lee Masters, finished March 7
020) Unorthodox Practices by Marissa Piesman, finished March 5
019) Happy Hour at Casa Dracula by Marta Acosta, finished March 4
018) A War of Gifts: An Ender Story by Orson Scott Card, finished Leap Day
017) Watership Down by Richard Adams, finished February 26
016) Old Boy Volume One by Garon Tsuchiya and Nobuaki Minegishi, finished February 25
015) Case Histories by Kate Atkinson, finished February 18
014) Ultimate Spider-Man: Ultimate Collection, Vol. 1 by Brian Michael Bendis and Mark Bagley, finished February 15
013) Trusting Jesus by Jeffrey R. Holland, finished February 11
012) Fables: 1001 Nights of Snowfall by Bill Willingham et al., finished February 11
011) Spook: Science Tackles the Afterlife by Mary Roach, finished February 4
010) The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold, finished February 3
009) American Born Chinese by Gene Luen Yang, finished LDotFMotNY
008) Zombification: Stories from National Public Radio by Andrei Codrescu, finished January 22
007) Marriage Lines: Notes of a Student Husband by Ogden Nash, finished January 22
006) Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen, finished January 20
005) The Salmon of Doubt: Hitchhiking the Galaxy One Last Time by Douglas Adams, finished January 14
004) Lord of the Flies by William Golding, finished January 10
003) Rising Sun by Michael Crichton, finished January 7
002) The Marketing of Sister B by Linda Hoffman Kimball, finished January 2
001) Animal Farm by George Orwell, finished January 1



The First Five ( 001 / 005 )
The Second Five ( 005 / 010 )
The Third Five ( 011 / 015 )
The Fourth Five ( 016 / 020 )
The Fifth Five ( 021 / 025 )
The Sixth Five ( 026 / 030 )
The Seventh Five ( 031 / 035 )
The Eighth Five ( 036 / 040 )
The Ninth Five ( 041 / 045 )
The Tenth Five ( 046 / 050)
The Eleventh Five ( 051 / 055)
The Twelfth Five ( 056 / 060)
The Thirteenth Five ( 061 / 065)
The Fourteenth Five ( 066 / 070)
The Fifteenth Five ( 071 / 075)
The Sixteenth Five ( 076 / 080)