I am a lifelong, practicing member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I served a LDS Mission and was married in the Salt Lake Temple. I lived in Utah from my infancy until I moved to the East Coast at age 27. The Church is absolutely integral to who I am. I love being a member and I try (with varying success) to follow its precepts.
After finishing the series, I was struck by the difference between how most people describe practicing members of the LDS Church (happy, friendly, hard-working, self-sufficient); and how they are portrayed here. I counted twenty characters in the show who are (or were) clearly LDS, and who had a sufficient role in the series to form an opinion on their character, and it's not positive: Naïve (Heather), Nosy (Pam), Disillusioned (Scott), Homicidal (Carl), Intolerant (Cindi), Clintonian (Ray), Calculating (Sen. Dwyer), Blackmailing (Ted), Pedophilic (Greg), Vindictive (Wendy), Ostracizing (Nancy), Suicidal (Dale), Puritanical (Bishop Devery), Arrogant (Michael Sainte), Conniving (State Rep. Roy Colburn), Incompetent (Salty), Compromising (Emma Smith), Tyrannical (Stake President Kennedy), and Pushy (LDS Missionary Companionship).
Does the above accurately portray a representative sample of LDS members? Not really. Further, the LDS Church as an organization is consistently portrayed in the show as sinister and all-powerful. In one episode, Cara Lynn is scolded for walking home by herself because of the fear that a Church member would inflict physical harm. Nicki then refers to a letter regarding polygamy read in LDS Church Meetings as a "fatwa." How nice. Little LDS digs like this abound throughout the series.
Olsen and Scheffer spent three years researching for the show before its creation. Given how unfavorably LDS members are portrayed, I often wondered if they had a specific grievance against the Church. I was unable to find any evidence of that, so my theory is simply that their intention was to create an entertaining television show; rather than an accurate picture of how real people in these situations would act and interact. As such, where reality and juicy storytelling conflict, they favor storytelling.
I hesitate to comment on other reviews of the show, but I was somewhat surprised at two common threads in the other reviews: (1) the number of reviews submitted in 2006 when the show was still in its infancy, and (2) the number of reviews that mentioned the quality of the writing. This made me wonder what people consider "good writing." Is it "good" if it's interesting? Or compelling? Or complex? Or funny? "Good" by itself seems to be just specific enough to persuade people to watch, but just vague enough that it doesn't really have to mean anything at all.
I could list numerous inaccuracies portrayed as given truths in the series (major ones have been submitted as goofs on each episode's page), but suffice it to say that I was not particularly impressed by the writing. It may be because I was watching episodes of a weekly television show in rapid succession; but it seemed like the characters fell in and out of each other's favor with breakneck frequency. Nicky accrues tens of thousands in credit card debt? No problem—wait an episode or two and it will blow over. Alby attempts to kill his mother with a pipe bomb at a motel? Don't worry—she'll soon publicly protest his incarceration (for a different crime). Ben has premarital sex and wants to hold the Aaronic Priesthood? Sure—we'll give him a pass. Frank and Lois try to kill each other? No sweat—they'll make up soon. Dozens of story lines like this—major, harrowing life events—seem to resolve themselves effortlessly with no further mention or consequences. Additionally, I was mildly disappointed on several occasions when the writers seemed to go out of their way to dredge up old anti-Mormon canards such as Blood Atonement, Danites, and the number, age, and marital status of Joseph Smith's wives. Three years of research didn't necessarily seem to shine through in the show—unless, perhaps, the three years was spent researching anti-Mormon material.
The series also explores the use of the word "Mormon" itself. Many people use it synonymously with "LDS." Others use it for ANY organization or belief that accepts Joseph Smith as a prophet. Under this definition, the FLDS Church, the Community of Christ, the LDS Church, and numerous other smaller groups could accurately be called "Mormon." I'm not advocating the correctness of any one definition, but I urge viewers of the show to keep in mind that "Mormon" doesn't always mean what people assume it means.
Some of the show's reviews asked why someone would ever practice plural marriage. While I don't (/wouldn't want to) practice it, it all boils down to a question of putting faith into action. When you commit to follow God's commandments no matter what, and when you believe that God still speaks through a prophet as he did in former times, the logical progression of this syllogism (for us) is that you do what the prophet says, even if it is inconvenient, or expensive, or tiring, or (in extremely rare cases) illegal. THAT is the logic behind the practice of plural marriage. Clearly, it can (and does) get twisted by some who prey on the faithful, but that was never the purpose. Similarly, if you can you think of something you value in your life above upholding the law, something that you consider moral and necessary that you would do even if it were illegal, you can now begin to understand their mentality.
Believe it or not, my main purpose here is NOT to steer anyone away from the show. I heartily enjoyed the series. It's extremely entertaining. I would simply request of anyone who watches, however, to please remember that this is fiction, and that the majority of what you see is a heavily distorted caricature of deeply held beliefs and sincere people who are trying to follow Jesus Christ and help their fellow man.
After finishing the series, I was struck by the difference between how most people describe practicing members of the LDS Church (happy, friendly, hard-working, self-sufficient); and how they are portrayed here. I counted twenty characters in the show who are (or were) clearly LDS, and who had a sufficient role in the series to form an opinion on their character, and it's not positive: Naïve (Heather), Nosy (Pam), Disillusioned (Scott), Homicidal (Carl), Intolerant (Cindi), Clintonian (Ray), Calculating (Sen. Dwyer), Blackmailing (Ted), Pedophilic (Greg), Vindictive (Wendy), Ostracizing (Nancy), Suicidal (Dale), Puritanical (Bishop Devery), Arrogant (Michael Sainte), Conniving (State Rep. Roy Colburn), Incompetent (Salty), Compromising (Emma Smith), Tyrannical (Stake President Kennedy), and Pushy (LDS Missionary Companionship).
Does the above accurately portray a representative sample of LDS members? Not really. Further, the LDS Church as an organization is consistently portrayed in the show as sinister and all-powerful. In one episode, Cara Lynn is scolded for walking home by herself because of the fear that a Church member would inflict physical harm. Nicki then refers to a letter regarding polygamy read in LDS Church Meetings as a "fatwa." How nice. Little LDS digs like this abound throughout the series.
Olsen and Scheffer spent three years researching for the show before its creation. Given how unfavorably LDS members are portrayed, I often wondered if they had a specific grievance against the Church. I was unable to find any evidence of that, so my theory is simply that their intention was to create an entertaining television show; rather than an accurate picture of how real people in these situations would act and interact. As such, where reality and juicy storytelling conflict, they favor storytelling.
I hesitate to comment on other reviews of the show, but I was somewhat surprised at two common threads in the other reviews: (1) the number of reviews submitted in 2006 when the show was still in its infancy, and (2) the number of reviews that mentioned the quality of the writing. This made me wonder what people consider "good writing." Is it "good" if it's interesting? Or compelling? Or complex? Or funny? "Good" by itself seems to be just specific enough to persuade people to watch, but just vague enough that it doesn't really have to mean anything at all.
I could list numerous inaccuracies portrayed as given truths in the series (major ones have been submitted as goofs on each episode's page), but suffice it to say that I was not particularly impressed by the writing. It may be because I was watching episodes of a weekly television show in rapid succession; but it seemed like the characters fell in and out of each other's favor with breakneck frequency. Nicky accrues tens of thousands in credit card debt? No problem—wait an episode or two and it will blow over. Alby attempts to kill his mother with a pipe bomb at a motel? Don't worry—she'll soon publicly protest his incarceration (for a different crime). Ben has premarital sex and wants to hold the Aaronic Priesthood? Sure—we'll give him a pass. Frank and Lois try to kill each other? No sweat—they'll make up soon. Dozens of story lines like this—major, harrowing life events—seem to resolve themselves effortlessly with no further mention or consequences. Additionally, I was mildly disappointed on several occasions when the writers seemed to go out of their way to dredge up old anti-Mormon canards such as Blood Atonement, Danites, and the number, age, and marital status of Joseph Smith's wives. Three years of research didn't necessarily seem to shine through in the show—unless, perhaps, the three years was spent researching anti-Mormon material.
The series also explores the use of the word "Mormon" itself. Many people use it synonymously with "LDS." Others use it for ANY organization or belief that accepts Joseph Smith as a prophet. Under this definition, the FLDS Church, the Community of Christ, the LDS Church, and numerous other smaller groups could accurately be called "Mormon." I'm not advocating the correctness of any one definition, but I urge viewers of the show to keep in mind that "Mormon" doesn't always mean what people assume it means.
Some of the show's reviews asked why someone would ever practice plural marriage. While I don't (/wouldn't want to) practice it, it all boils down to a question of putting faith into action. When you commit to follow God's commandments no matter what, and when you believe that God still speaks through a prophet as he did in former times, the logical progression of this syllogism (for us) is that you do what the prophet says, even if it is inconvenient, or expensive, or tiring, or (in extremely rare cases) illegal. THAT is the logic behind the practice of plural marriage. Clearly, it can (and does) get twisted by some who prey on the faithful, but that was never the purpose. Similarly, if you can you think of something you value in your life above upholding the law, something that you consider moral and necessary that you would do even if it were illegal, you can now begin to understand their mentality.
Believe it or not, my main purpose here is NOT to steer anyone away from the show. I heartily enjoyed the series. It's extremely entertaining. I would simply request of anyone who watches, however, to please remember that this is fiction, and that the majority of what you see is a heavily distorted caricature of deeply held beliefs and sincere people who are trying to follow Jesus Christ and help their fellow man.