Bishops Part 1

 Bishops (2017: Begun in 2017, last known circa November)

If you have never known a bishop I can tell you about a few.

And if you question off the bat why you should care in the first place, or why it should matter to anyone to know about bishops, according to some of my interpretations,  allow me to inform you that there are those who posit faith in the order of a divine priesthood which these bishops possess, even to indicate that not only is God paying attention and is good because of them, their existence and presence, but that God directs earthly servants for His own gracious purposes, and does much of His works through these individuals. More indications of a harder to know unseen power for good, that is what makes many wonder.And is worth contemplation and investigation.

If that is not compelling enough, then keep reading and maybe consider something new all the same. This may prove nothing but the escaping or ethereal memories of yesteryear.

God is mysterious and so His servants can be. Worth investigating, anyway. Perhaps there are clues of goodness in these people, their thoughts and deeds.

On a secular humanistic scale, it does provide a metric of some sorts of how things work organizationally, both in sociology and psychology. Social science, at a minimum.

Many of you know a good share of these men, who are all male, (albeit most have wives, who "complete" their position and status); that is part of the tale; I know far more of you who might read this post and not have met any bishops, living or dead. Nor their wives or children, which again, is part of the story. Now I will regale you with a few stories and descriptions of the ones that I have known and observed.

A few things that I realize over the years, now in 2017, having known my share of bishops since at least the early 1970s, is that not only do the individual bishops vary in their personality and styles, but the constituent's (the ward members under the stewardship of the bishop) time and station in life also predicates much of the interaction or feel for each of the people appointed to that calling.

That is certainly the case for me, the situation and circumstances I found myself in while these brethren were my bishops changed my impressions and memories of them. A bishop to a ward member at age 12 is different than when 21, or when 33 or even 44.

Throughout my life I have various amounts of memories, impressions, and comments about the different bishops that I have known and known me, which can be an informative survey of both how the organization of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is composed, and be a more personal look into who we are as well, as members, humans, fellow participants of a world of faith and doubt, religion and secularism.

1)    1.       Bishop Wright: My earliest memories of the first bishop of memory is this brother.
;     I don't know his first name, I have few scant thoughts about him, a couple specific ones.
      For starters, without any direct comment on him, but the surroundings and culture knowing how things usually would work in my hometown, Bishop Wright was probably a student who was from the Inter-mountain West who was in Bloomington with his wife and family in order to get a graduate degree from Indiana University.  He was more likely a doctoral candidate than a two year Business major or obtaining a law degree,  so that the Indianapolis Stake at the time could use him for at least 3-4 years, maybe 5.
            The only two things that I recall from my years of childhood about Bishop Wright is his appearance, and a small recollection. He had a rounded face, (that some could interpret as full or fat), he seemed to be bald or balding, darker hair, and I believe he wore rather thick glasses. And he seemed to be tall, but at age 3 or 5 or whatever I was, all adults are tall.
    The other more distinct memory of Bishop Wright was that one Sunday after Church we kids were behind a door near the bishop's office, and a small daughter of the bishop was upset that we held the door closed to her, and she exclaimed, "You better let me in or I am going to tell my dad, and he is the Bishop, and he can get you in trouble!" That was the first time that I had heard or perhaps contemplated the authority of the bishop as something to be wielded as a power of discipline or correction. This was a false doctrine, in some ways, but in some ways she was hinting at a truth that had some validity. Bishops did have power. My first lesson, or at least one that I recall, about bishops. (And their kids!)

2)      2. Bishop Hansen: I do not have  a lot of memories of Bishop Hansen, perhaps more of his wife and his house.

3)     3. Bishop Wankier

4)     4. Bishop Samuelsen

5)      5. Bishop Peterson

7-12) Chile (5)

13) Bishop Morley

14)BYU-Helaman Halls

15)BYU—Deseret Towers

16)BYU—Centennial

17) Chillan—Bishop Bizama

18) BYU--- Heritage Halls

19) BYU—Language Housing

20) Bishop Jerusalem

21) BYU—Bishop French and Italian

22) BYU—Anderson Apartments

23) BYU—Same as before

24) Branch President Allen

25) Branch President McLean

26) Bishop Frost

27) Bishop Wright (LA)

28) Presidente Orellena

29) Presidente Miranda

30) President Clinch

31) Bishop Diaz

32) Bishop Belmont Ridge

33) Bishop Brambleton

34) Bishop/BP Ft. Leonard Wood

35) Bishop Gental

36) Group Leader Elder Arizona (4 plus months)

37) Bishop Shimazaki

38) Group Leader Major David

39) Group Leader near International Airport (3 months)

40) Bishop Thomas

 

Israelis and Palestinians, 21st Century

Israelis and Palestinians, 21st Century

(Last edited/written around July 10, 2017. Not sure when begun. Perhaps the mid 1980s. Today: 5/16/2018)

World War Two made it harder on the Holy Land, set it in a state of tension and rivalry. It is still part of the landscape today, well into the 21st century. It added a lot more pressure for the diaspora of the Jews, those that had survived that woe-fallen generation, to gather back to the place of their origins and call a place their own, a land of Godly respite and mourning. A physical sackcloth and ashes for these long-since removed peoples of Judah. And the Benjaminites, too, most likely.

The Philistines, or Palestinians (Arabs), meanwhile, did not feel as though the terrible actions of the Germans in Europe needed to affect their standing in the Middle East as they fashioned themselves a newly independent post British colony. But it did. And the new-founded United Nations decided in November 1947 that the Holy Land could be divided evenly and amicably for the good of all.

The Palestinians, not a "historical people" as pointed out to me by a UCLA political science professor, disagreed with the proposition of the new-start United Nations, and the following spring the newly branded Israelis forced their hand. It has been dicey ever since. 69 years later, generations of strife. Killing, hateful propaganda, threats, broken promises and treaties, peer pressure from the international community, caustic rhetoric from all sides, votes of no confidence, suicide bombings, deadly checkpoints and endless accusations and recriminations, and the list goes on ...

   There is no peace in the Middle East, and this is most likely the true root of it.

   It's ugly. It's sad. And perhaps worst of all, it fans the flames of passions and odium across the world in various ways.

  For a while in the early 2000s, under a new president and huge struggles of the second intifada, I had some hopes that we, the United States, the most powerful country in the world, could or would step in an make a difference.

An uncle with power can separate and leverage over his warring nephews. That is the United States to younger Israel and Palestine.

No. No, we do not intervene like we should.

Of course some would always cry foul.

We were involved with the deadly jihadis of Afghanistan, and then Iraq, and later across the globe.

_______________________________________________________________
May 20, 2018. Thinking, mulling, stewing, pondering, analyzing, grieving, and contemplating over the "two state solution" and the "peace process" and the post-nakba and the post- Balfour and the post-Holocaust and the post-modern miasma of the Holy Land, I suppose that I will end my commentary on this note:

As an American, a US citizen who has served in the military, and participated in civic and international groups and missions to make our world safer, i.e. better, I have a serious qualm about US thinking regarding Israel and the Palestinians. We have been wrong for decades.

As much as we justify the existence, protection, and security of the now 70 year -old state of Israel, we are flawed in the way that we conceptualize Palestine.

Have we, the United States, the United Nations (enabling the existence of modern Israel post-World War II in the first place), the greater citizen-shipped world, allow the Palestinians to be non-stateless for seven decades?

We have allowed them, the natively born Arabs Muslims and Christians of the West Bank and Gaza, to be the perpetual, multi-generational, stateless non-citizens.

Sure, fellow Arab neighbors should be as ashamed and blamed: Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, and other autocratic powers (Iraq and Saudi Arabia) have done little to help the substantiated pride or cause of their fellow Arabs.

Shame on us all! Shame on every American politician and citizen who has attempted to delve into international affairs. Hypocrites and ignoramuses. We have created our own monsters.

We have spawned, now, generations of irrational actors, many of them converting into terrorists.

Surprise as to what happens when millions are not qualified as part of rational actors, legitimate states!

What would any reasonable person expect?

By allowing the Palestinian people to flounder as non-citizens of a non-state for decades, going on a century (really?) we have by default allowed the principles that our forefathers George Washington or Thomas Jefferson or Abraham Lincoln, or Teddy and Franklin Delano Roosevelt would have espoused: let these people have a legitimate voice!

Or, like the American slaves of the past, or our tragic native American legacy in the United States and other Western Hemisphere lands, or more recent South African apartheid, we allow these vast populations, whole cities, communities, identities as nations, to wallow and even dangerously foment into a hostile cause.

But for world politics and affairs, this would not stop here in the Holy Land of the three great faiths.

By the 1990s it spread to the eastern Horn of Africa in the shape of three less-than-sovereign actors where there was one: Somalia is actually three. Somalia, perhaps more accurately depicted as the Land of Southern Somalis, Puntland, and Somali Land. Quasi-states, also known as failed states.

Three decades later there is no solution there. But that seems immaterial, because the glaring precedent of Palestine had been firmly established and rooted. If we cannot get this case fixed after 70 years, why the Horn of Africa after 30?

Who cares about a few million citizens who do not not have nationally elected leaders, fair or otherwise? Who cares if these millions are able to represent themselves on the modern stages of the United Nations or world trade councils? We have not cared if the people of the West Bank or Gaza have had these rights for our whole lives, we are sickeningly immune to the plight of stateless ones, they among many.

Enter the Arab Spring, and the consequent Arab winter:

The earth is multi-populated with stateless or quasi-stateless peoples: Syria, Yemen, Libya. Failed states, and consequently millions of people who suffer the pangs of instability, war, and devastation.

Will this trend continue? It seems likely. What will this mean to our world?

Mini-factories of irrational actors begetting terrorists and other "illegal" groups of non-citizens?

I am not trying to be an alarmist, but merely stating and summarizing some facts.

The "Palestinian Precedent" of quasi-statehood since 1948, unfulfilled citizen rights, ignorance of equality under human and world law, constant terrorist attempts as defined by many in order to leverage considered unfair power, has festered into a cancerous outgrowth seemingly exported into the 21st century world writ large.

People of planet earth: we have a problem.

We need to be aware of what is, or what IS NOT, happening. People do things that are  naturally available to them. If they know they are not officially accounted for as a state actor and citizens of that state, they move on to other options.

This is not what the United States or the United Nations wants.

We want official state actors.

While interviewing for a prestigious US government agency in February of 2004, the rather condescending interviewee questioned me if I knew of the newest recognized "state" in the world, that according to him, had cropped up in the last year. Obviously an important priority to be aware of. By implication an important world development that the United States prioritizes.

I quickly reviewed my "last year" memories, thinking of nothing, I then countered to him: "Do you mean the last two years?" I paid attention to world affairs. I read the Economist and other international periodicals and journals, I had just graduated with a Masters in Latin American Studies from UCLA.  I took classes with world class professors of economics, geo-politics, history, and other pertinent subjects. I paid attention to the whole world, perhaps more so after September of 2001.

So the interviewee's response was: "East Timor". Hah! He got me!


His response was short and decisive, even authoritative with hubris.

I was perplexed by missing this "key" and important "last year" (not two year) addition to the geo-political landscape. How could I have forgotten something that I watched unfold on live TV when it happened, while boning up on world affairs in my apartment in Los Angeles, just 21 months prior?

The answer: it occurred in May 2002. That, to me anyway, involves a two year window. Not one, as the interviewee confidently asserted. You could say he purposely or mistakenly misled me.

I gave that guy a chance to be right. No matter. He was the one calling the shots. Might makes right. I did not get the job.

Fourteen years ago for me, some water under the bridge. That interview affected me, to what degree I am not sure. I still think about it, it probably still affects how I think or operate.

Drawing back to the original point of the of Palestinian malaise that the United States has not properly dealt with: people are wrong, people are forgetful, people make each other upset. People mislead one another.

Natural.

However, people do do the right thing, people will remember, people can grow to pardon and co-exist in peace.

 The United States has to understand that the Palestinian non-statehood issue is not right or good for us or Israel. It has has not been right since 1948; this precedence has lead to very dangerous problems worldwide.

We need to help fix it. In order to help these peoples cooperate, like Irish Republicans of Sinn Fein and the Protestant Ulster troubles, the politics of Catholic versus Protestant, we need to insert our leverage and power.

We, the most powerful country on the planet, have to understand and then act on what it right:

Ending the monarchy rule of the 13 colonies. Terminating slavery. Allowing native tribes to have their own sovereignty. Combating dictators and over-aggressive military regimes. Defending against and dealing with terrorist organizations. Allowing all people to have a right to proper citizenship, in places where we have direct influences.

I argue that we are in power. Our US and NATO might can make right.

But not if we pompously look down our nose with gross hubris and say:

"No, we know the right answer", when truly we have been mistaken almost from the beginning.

All people, like black South Africans, have a right to be represented as actors of an acknowledged state.

Get it right. Stop the madness of non-citizen nations.

Allow Palestine to define who they are. Same as Afghanistan, same as Iraq.

We do have precedence established, my brilliant patriotic law makers that we have put in office decade after decade.

Why continue down the wrong path? Is there an ulterior motive at hand?

Greed? Corruption? Favoritism? Cultural superiority? Guilt? Ignorance? Ehtnocentric myopia? "Balance of power?".

Poor excuses for fixing a problem that has existed and threatened us for generations.

We are better than that.

I believe we can do the right thing; it takes some horse sense to get it enacted.

Questions? You ought to have a few. The answers are there too, if you care.

Mom, the World Collector

 Mom, the World Collector

     My mother Ruth grew to do a few things in her lifetime. 

     One of her passions was to collect antiques.

    She was born a little before the United States entered World War II, the summer of 1940, in a part of the country that has older homes, some of them even colonial; historical houses of the early heritage of our American ancestors. Not super old by other nation standards, but old for the United States.

A land of villages and hamlets on the northeast Atlantic coast steeped in history.

Abraham Lincoln convinced our country that the legacy of the Pilgrims and the native Americans was a thing of thanksgiving and gratitude, which occurred not too far away.

Maybe as a child she was fascinated by trinkets, by colorful woods and metals and glassware; maybe the lack of those things built up a reserve or hunger in her psyche; her family was less well off than many of the families where she and her older siblings attended school. Maybe she did not have easy access to such things.

As a young nurse she learned to look after other humans, large and small. She collected experiences of care and compassion.

As she went on to marry, have three children, and help raise a few more foster ones, her interest in relics increased.

Jewelry.  Trinkets.  Art.  China.  Handicrafts.  Baubles.  Dishes.  Frames.  Goblets.  Chalices. Portraits. Credenzas.  Hutches.  Trophies. Wine glasses.  Saucers.  Tea Spoons. Heir looms.  Rugs. Knives.  Tools.  Carpets.  Baskets. Books. Keepsakes. Memorabilia.  Treasures.  Personal items.  Advertisements from yesteryear.  Magazines.  Americana.  Stones, pearls, gems, silvers, and golds...

En fin: todo bajo del sol. (In the end: everything below the sun).

She collected it all.

Over the decades she watched and searched, pouring over scrap sales and yard rummages and all types of auctions and markets of fleas and their dogs and otherwise.  The centuries piled up and left their wake, mere detritus to some, but hidden valued pieces and members of unheard of nuggets of priceless parts to her and those who would know.

Those who collected and bought, refinished and re-sold. Some things she would keep.

Antiques. Collectibles. The market of ultimate accountability, and it became hers.

The world was her oyster, and she knew wherein lay the prize.

Beyond the hunt, the awareness, the recognition, the purchase, the sale, the negotiations and bartering, the give and take of the sale, was the underlying dream of the artifact: the human behind the treasure was actually the most valued keepsake. The memory of the creator. The unknown value of the eternal remnant left over from years and times seemingly lost, now found in a piece of the human handiwork designed by a mortal soul. Long lost, but now found.

Salvation realized.

Mom went to far and near lands, outwardly helping, inwardly collecting.

Lome, Sokode, Shengi, Bonthe, Freetown, Bloomington, Nashville, Brimfield,  Nassau, Tahoe, West Baden, Phnom Penh, Surabaya, Colombus...

She collected worldly things, remnants of mortal remains.

She saw and touched the world.

She grew up and beyond the everyday belongings.

She purchased and sold, traded and dealt.

She moved past the current veil, and now does her dealings in the skies.

Where worm nor dust will corrupt.

Her treasures are now up in heaven. Her legacies remain.

The collections left behind here on the earth, guarded and stored.

Mom, my earthly and heavenly mother, the collector.

Dreams collect and dissipate; my memories, all those memories, all the recollections gathered for the world to unearth, where no earthly stain corrupts. A place of clear skies and peace, an everlasting calm and tranquil abode. With arts and crafts and rugs and tapestries of life and love.

She collected them all.

 

100 Questions to the Suitor

1. What do you like to do?

2. Where do you like to go?

3. What do you like to read?

4. What work have you done and what would you like to work in?

5. What is the best job you have ever participated in?

6. What is the dirtiest job that you have been involved in?

7. Where would you like to travel?

8. What languages interest you?

9. What is your favorite book? Why?

10. Who has been your favorite teacher?

11. What countries are successful or to your liking?

12. What do you think of alcohol or other chemical substances?

13. What do you think of God or a Higher Power?

14. What do you know about the 10 commandments? Are they applicable today or antiquated?

15. What is something that you honor or cherish regarding your parents?

16. What do think about the US Constitution?

17. What music do you like?

18. What genre of literature do you most enjoy?

19. What do think of marriage?
20. How many children would you like to have?
21. What has been your favorite vacation? Why?
22. What kind of questions are too personal to ask suitors?
23. What questions are most important to know for you about a potential mate?
24. What would you like your children to have and do? And how would you like them to be like?
25. What sports and physical activity do you enjoy?
26. What is your least favorite subject?
27. Who has been your least favorite teacher?
28. What book would you recommend for an older person to read?
29. What book would you recommend for a younger person to read?
30. Do you consider yourself friendly?
31. Do you consider yourself kind?
32. What is the bravest things you have ever done?
33. What is the meanest thing you have ever done?
34. What scares you?
35. What sciences do you enjoy?
36. What math would like to stop at?
37. Do you think you could become wealthy someday? Why or why not?
38. What do you think about guns?
39. What instruments do you like to play?
40. What is your philosophy on education?
41. What is an appropriate arrival time for a minor on a school night?
42. What is an appropriate arrival time for a minor on a weekend night?
43.  What is an argument that you had that you regret?
44. How easy is it to admit you are wrong?
45. If you could write a book what would it be about?
46. If you could write a play what would it be about?
47. If you could write an article what would it be about?
48. If you could talk to one past ancestor who would it be?
49. If you could talk to one historical figure who would it be?
50. If you could talk to one religious figure who would it be?
51. If you could talk to one US president who would it be?

52. What do you think about prayer?
53. What organized faiths do you like? Why?
54. Which organized faiths do you not like? Why?
55. Do you have a favorite TV show? What and why?
56. Is there a nursery rhyme or fantasy story that speaks to you? That explains you?
57. What school test has made you the proudest or most impressed with yourself?
58. What is a good time to go to bed?
59. What is a good time to wake up?
60. Where is a good vacation destination?
61. What is a good vacation?
62. What do you think of monogamy?
63. What is a good age to be married?
64. How involved do you want to be with your children?
65. What are things that your family does that you want to do in the future?
66. What do you like to think about when you are bored?
67. Do you like to talk about politics? Why or why not?
68. If you could run for office, which one would you run for?
69. Are you generally optimistic or pessimistic?
70. What causes war?
71. What causes pain?
72. How can one obtain peace?
73. Are there secrets worth keeping? Give an example.
74. What US war was the most justified?
75. What US war was the least justified?
76. What is a fair type of health care for you? For society?
77. What would be a reason to sacrifice your life, if any?
78. Is pornography a problem, and has it affected the Millenials more than previous generations?
79. What are some good things about social media?
80. What are some bad things about social media?
81. What is your dream date?
82. How do you deal with people that you do not like?
83. How do you drive? Defensively, aggressively, or some other kind?
84. What would you like to accomplish by age 50?
85. Do you have a 5 year plan for the future? If so, what is it?
86. What questions would you like to ask of the famous or desired people that you have thought of?
87. What are trends in the US that you would like to change?
88. What things in the world would you change?
89. Is humanity progressing well or are things generally the same as always?
90. If you could go back in time for one year before you were born, what year would you pick?
91. Are there significant differences between the genders?
92. If there are significant differences in the genders, what are they?
93. What is the worst type of discrimination?
94. What are your favorite foods?
95. Do you try new foods when you get a chance?
96. What has been your favorite vacation that you have taken part of?
97. Are there charities worth donating time and money to? Which ones?
98. How do you think most people describe you?
99. Are you generally open to probing questions or closed to them?
100. What questions do you have for me?

The Dad, and some from the mother and others.

Punktown, USA

Punktown, USA

Bloomington in the 1980s

I'm not sure where all the ideas of being "punk" came from, but I am pretty sure Rolling Stone magazine has done an excellent job chronicling its sordid history over the years. I use the word "sordid" to give some credit to the movement and its ideas, because I think maybe punks want to me known as such. If not, forgive me. I am not of the punks, per se, but I have my viewpoints. I do think many of them would accept being called sordid, although it is more likely even more of them would not appreciate being labeled at all.

In that case, ignore me.

But, for the record on this modest forum, I present just a few ideas about punk life, from a guy who has paid fair attention to the local, national, and international scenes for a few decades ...

Some Context of History

The 1950s rehashed the ideas of the 1920s, a time after a US interventionist war where people partied or tuned out or tuned in, imbibing or smoking or eventually snorting and/or injecting all the chemicals that would enhance the experience. Movies and then television also helped with distractions. Perhaps the modern day electronic gadgets of video gaming and phones and smart appliances have alleviated the greater addictions of chemicals? Nevertheless, in the 20th century millions of G.I.s came home and wanted some normalcy, the Dough Boys from Europe in the traumatic trenches in the 1920s; World War II and Korea brought more foreign tragedy and loss to our men and women abroad. An then there was Vietnam.

Enter the 1970s, and maybe the dadaists, the avant guardists of the post World War I era were brought full circle. Nothing mattered, except the moment. Did life really matter? Shakespeare wrote about the idiot "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Hemingway wrote "nada a nada." Nothing to nothing. Could life have a greater, deeper, significance? We were schoolmates of the children of Holocaust survivors, who taught Jewish studies in the post-war era.

But worse yet, we were the post-hippie, post-industrial, post modern age. Who or what were we?

We were all punks of a sort. All heaped together, no matter the race or creed.

Nothing had meaning, love and peace were the byword, not killing and burning and maiming. Film and television brought it home in Technicolor. Dead babies, dead villages, burnt out country sides and burnt out soldiers and Marines. Joseph's Conrad's Heart of Darkness meets the machine gun, napalm, Agent Orange, and helicopter hell fire.

The 1970s: finally the decade that offered the post-modern post rebellion. Enter the PUNKS.

Jack Kerouac found the beat scene, well the punks found something even darker.

Vietnam was the war to end all wars for the punks.

What else was there?

Colombia cranked up the crank, marijuana became a part of college campuses everywhere, a safer escapade than LSD and mushrooms. Weed was tame, it accompanied the lifestyle of the hippies and ghettos, and just plain old GIs or misfits. Punks could be part that scene, only more nihilist.

Everybody came together.

Drugs, and rock, and some physical presence, which was dark.

Fast drums, hard beats, flashy retro jewelry like ear gages or other skin piercings.

Spiked and mutlti-colored hair, the end of the old, the traditional.

Songs that approached shout fests, rants and tirades against the Man, the Government.

Not just to question authority as the bumper stickers touted, but give it a middle finger. And some other choice words and epithets.

Curse the universe! Yeah, that feels good. Hard music. Hard drugs.

A new way of Bohemia, a combative approach to tackle the world.

Punks tuned in by tuning out. The scared looks that they provoked were calculated and shared.

We are not you, older, tireder, conservative, even passe hippies and tree huggers, or worse: those of old fashioned values.

We don't give a flip. Yeah, that's an "F" word.

My town in the 1980s; Mellencamp was not the only rocker

Bloomington had a large university among a smaller populace in a mid-west city.  A small city of two high schools, with only so many downtown alleys to scrawl the Anarchy symbol or at least, the Peace Sign or other symbolic urban missives. The kids in town that became a punk full blown or flirted with the notion, that mostly belonged to the elementary schools within the city limits, had access to a few keys that welcomed them to the punk scene.

Parents with worldly knowledge and money.

Youthful disdain for the countrified youth of the county, Monroe, and surrounding suburbs of kids who might be considered preppy and rich, spoiled or soft. They were the third option ...

Not jocks, not nerds, not hicks, but still strong and cool and in your face.

Punk.

Rebels, cool, counter-culture.

Smart enough to know better, and part of a larger global scene. You could see it on MTV and other media venues, and you could certainly see it in the local record shops and publications.

Some university students followed it, creating their own mini-markets where the information flowed.

In middle school some of my cohorts were taking to the Punk Scene, many of them attracted by older siblings in high school, or even some beyond 12th grade, who tapped into the lifestyle.

Or at least the look and attitude. The hair. The language. The music. The drugs.

If you dressed punk, you most likely were a punk, but not always.

Some kids dabbled. They mixed and matched.

Some liked skateboards. Others more the music. Or the posture.

The counter-culture. The weed. The hair. The message.

Don't mess with me. I know better, life is dark. Things are wrong. I gotta be loud and proud.

We protest all of this. BLEEP! [Insert the overarchingly defiant profane and filthy curse word of your choice.] BLEEP OFF! BLEEP IT ALL!!!

As far as numbers of Bloomington Punks?

Not sure. Maybe 100 at South. My high school. The late 1980s. Maybe 50 at North? A smaller school. Maybe a few floating in the wings in the middle schools.

How many were totally dedicated? Not sure. How much one did each one dedicate to the life?

How many IU students espoused the culture and lifestyle? Maybe not a lot, out of 35 some thousand.

How long did their identities as punks last? How long could it be sustained? Maybe Punk was simply the outsider label for them.

Again, not sure.

The more I reflect on the Town Punks of the Eighties, the less I can be sure about.

I was outside to them. I knew some. I heard of others. I observed some behavior and attitudes, some music and some partying.

I smelled the pot a few times (not always them, of course), I heard the vitriolic speeches. I saw the graffiti, I read some stories and watched some shows.

But I can tell you this, Punks were a part of my town. The message was alive and present.

At the end of the day, was it simply a show full of sound and fury, signifying nothing?

No: like many ideas, arts, or movements, it had its place.

They were few, they were a minority. But they expressed themselves for real reasons, and moved on to other stages and climes.

The Punks had their day. And they'll be around again, as sure as the US fights wars and youths are disgruntled.

They may dress different, talk of different issues. But they will be around.

You will see your own Punktowns.

You will see Punks out on the street.

Good, Even Great, Authors

Good, Even Great, Authors

Chaim Potok is a great writer.

Why? I will explain.

Many critics of writing and prose may judge artistic style and utilization of literary devices as their measure of writing "greatness". Some themes and stories are considered so well crafted and structured that they are deemed great.

I guess that works out fine for James Joyce. And it suffices for a few artistically inclined literary followers around the world, especially the English intelligentsia that deem works of literature as great or not.

Chaim is not that well known as a world outstanding author, but he has been acclaimed in enough circles and some of his stories have been turned into movies over the decades. Not bad.

Of course popular media is not the best measure of great authorship.

Chaim Potok is great in my eyes because he writes about characters that play real parts of the world, people fictionalized that bespeak reality, perceptions of how things are and have been.

And extrapolating, he has shown how things could be in the future.

Great fiction does that. Fiction tells us more about truth and reality than mere fantasies and invention.

After reading Chaim Potok's fiction, I know more about Judaism. I know more about people, history, psychology.

Faith. Human struggles and triumphs, tragedies, and life.

Reality.

Chaim Potok shows me more of who we are as humans.

His characters are real enough and important enough to explain our issues: we are a people that search for meaning and morals, for a modicum of goodness despite trials and travails.

The hatred and violence directed at Jews. The atomic bomb. The South Korean conflict. Mental illness.

Belief and adherence to faith in God. Artistic expressions. What does it mean to have faith in an unseen divine concept or organization? What does it mean to be human?

How do we deal with conflicts, large and small? Individual and collective.

We seek after and read, ponder, and search. Discover and reveal.

Find truth.

Manhattan. Europe. Brooklyn. Cape Cod. South Korea. Japan. Israel.

The baseball diamond.

The Chabad Lubavitch movement.

Destruction. Genocide. Conflict. Madness. Pain. Sorrow. Struggle.

Reconciliation. Redemption. Oneness. Beauty. Love.

Potok has it all, and he has felt and written it all.

May his words and worlds be cherished. 

Thanks, Chaim. To you and your parents, your families, your people.

Theirs have become ours.

You have made us your family. 

That, ultimately, is great.

On and Off the Bus

On and Off the Bus

Visions of Modern Day Prophets; Some Followers Are Still Aboard

Back in the 1830s a religious movement began, like others before it, religious and visionary in some ways like other movements that had started for thousands of years, and also unlike others like it before or since. 

All movements have their unique qualities and idiosyncratic features.

Today (in 2018) this religious organization is known to most people, at least casually. There are many millions around the globe who have never heard of Latter-day Saints or Mormons, but there are new venues all the time where people learn. More lands and media than ever touch on its missions.

There is an active effort for it to expand and grow, to evangelize and proselytize. The Latter-day Saints are interested in proclaiming their message and inviting others to become members.

Some join. Most do not. It's hard to calculate how many people every year have the opportunity to open up their ears or homes to full time missionaries and do not. One million? 10 million? Maybe more.

Meanwhile, among those born and raised in the faith, there are those who "stay on the bus", and others who opt to get off and never return. Some return after lapses.

Some ex-members become belligerent; others are simply not interested or involved any longer, or have peripheral connections. Some of those who leave are somewhat lukewarm; there are those less actives that are somewhat favorable but not active, in all different shades.

There are three main reasons why Latter-day Saints stop practicing their active religion.

1. They do not believe in the faith or its doctrine or policies.

2. They find the practices and standards too difficult to practice.

3. They find the socialized peer pressure against its beliefs too heavy to bear.

Inevitably there is a mix of all three.

For example, a young (or old) person may feel large amounts of social peer pressure against their religion and their personal attempts at trying to live it, and therefore that person may cling to the doubts that counter the unique stances and beliefs of, in this case, the Mormon faith. When these two heavy negative weights are working against the member in powerful tandem, then the third weight of falling away from the practices and standards is a natural progression, or digression.

Sometimes some less active members point to an incident or moment where they were insulted, or perhaps overwhelmingly lost their faith from some smaller or at times traumatic event, and some indicate that the time of their less faithful activity came gradually.

Whatever the case, there are usually more "less-active Latter-Day Saints" (inactives) than there are active ones. Especially in some countries, like Chile, where thousands have joined the ranks on paper but have not attended meetings for years or decades.

So arguments are made and pitched around, how active and robust are the Mormons in the United States and around the world?

LDS temple activity is one indicator that the Church is in good shape. More temples (which require thousands of man hours to maintain) are functional and busy throughout the globe than ever before. There are more full time missionaries than ever.

There are robust numbers in the LDS Church's favor.

But there are plenty of disaffected and less active members, some of whom are hostile towards the faith. There are popular musicals and television or movies that mock the beliefs and notions of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Some current LDS leaders have referred to membership in the Church as "being on the Good Ship Zion." In other words, on board a bus of sorts.

A vehicle, a movement united in one cause, a place or thing aimed in one direction, stationary yet in motion, progressing or developing towards and end or means to those ends.

Some would contend it is worth the ride, to stay on board.

Others get on and off.

Others would have you avoid it, to turn away from it or even convince others to avoid or even stop it, to destroy it.

You can choose: to get on or off the bus.

I have ridden it a while. I am used to it. I enjoy it.

I invite others to come along and take the ride, enjoy the journey.

Get on, and stay on.

But that is just me. And a few million others.

Me, and most of them, believe that God Himself and His Son Jesus want the same.

At least, consider the passage necessary, and its destination.

Consider it well.