Comments on: Christian Kitsch – We Are Not Immune

By: Nate Oman

Nate Oman — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I have CTR socks which I dearly love!

By: Renee

Renee — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I volunteered to work a few days at the Nauvoo temple and was surprised at all the merchandizing. I wasn’t surprised seeing the shot glasses in gift stores by local merchants who are likely not LDS. But I am surprised at things I saw in Latter Day Harvest there and some things I’ve seen in Deseret Books everywhere.

Do we really need Hawaiian print t-shirts that say Johnny Lingo on one side and “Mahona you ugly” on the other?

I struggle with all the merchandising by members because I have a few things I really like – a small sunstone replica, some Greg Olsen prints, and a couple of CTR rings. But I canceled my subscription to LDS Living Magazine because of all the ads for expensive products and ads for “exclusive” vacations, communities, and cruises. I don’t think it jives with gospel principles to separate people from LOTS of money for material things. The reality is, however, that very few occupations these days are about basic needs (medical, agriculture, plumbing, electrical, etc). Most of us have jobs that provide “nice to have” stuff. So it goes with the peddlers of religious merchandising.

Where to draw the line? I’ll have a print of “O, Jerusalem” in my living room. But I doubt I’d buy my kids BoM action figures (which you can find at your local LDS bookstore).

All that said, I’m fine with The Passion tie-ins like a nail or cross. Those things seem more meaningful. Now if they market plastic figures in Happy Meals, that’s not cool. :^/

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Ah, the splendid knick-knacks of our faith. This attachment to little tangible things that remind us or others of our denominational affiliation certainly isn’t limited to Mormons, it must speak to some deeper aspect of human nature. Even Jews, supremely opposed to images and icons, have their share of knick-knacks. I suppose books (the kind we buy but don’t read, i.e., most books) are just a literate example of the same thing, displayed on the family-room bookshelf rather than dangling from the rear-view mirror.

By: Blake

Blake — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I, too, am disturbed by LDS Living magazine. I received my first issue last month (the subscription was a gift from my mother), and it truly was an eye-opener for me. I generally shy away from Mormon popular culture, avoiding most of the merchandise available at LDS bookstores, but it’s not hard to imagine what drives the merchandisers. The Mormon population is a demographic which is a prime target for niche marketing. That’s why there has been such a rapid proliferation of Mormon movies (“God’s Army” and its progeny) and so many CD’s and books. But I’m uncomfortable with these things, and when I enter an LDS bookstore (a rare occasion), I generally confine myself to the shelves of books written by the General Authorities. If I look at the other products, it’s only to remind myself of the horrors of Mormon popular culture and the opportunistic entrepreneurs who have exploited it.

By: Bob Caswell

Bob Caswell — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

“I struggle with all the merchandising by members because I have a few things I really like…”

Renee, you’ve just proven that this will never go away. Everyone has merchandise they love (like Nate and his socks) but almost all of us “draw the line” somewhere.

It’d be interesting to have the “where do we draw the line” conversation, but it would so incredibly subjective that only the word “pointless” comes to mind.

Thus, we just talk about it in jest.

By: Matt Evans

Matt Evans — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Hi Linda,

It sounds like you assumed the t-shirt was produced by Mormons, but the temple shot glasses and golf balls sound like run-of-them-mill souvenirs unlikely to have been made by Mormons.

This is an interesting question — which media are inappropriate for images of temples, prophets, Jesus, etc. The temple on fingernail clippers doesn’t bother me. Actually, I can’t think of many uses that do seem blasphemous to me — maybe my sense is that everything that can be conveyed in an image is, by definition, not “the divine”. And if it makes some lady feel good to have the temple on her toaster, why not?

By: cooper

cooper — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Funny, I have had this conversation with my sister for a long time. We are very creative people so we thought why not do a Mormonthemed “something”. Each and every time we attempted, we ended it quickly. Something jsut wasn’t right about the exploitation of sacred things. Even the simple CTR ring has gotten out of control It was a learning tool for 8 year olds, and has become a huge industry. Not that there is anything wrong with “Choosing the Right”. We really don’t need to market it. And don’t even get me started on the cost of LDS art. It’s nice that Greg Olsen is a good artist, but good grief how many of have to build that house for him? It’s just too expensive for prints.

My favorites LDS Living product: Temple Checks. Put a picture of the most sacred palce we all can go and combine it with the filthy lucre of the world. Amazing!

By: Kristine

Kristine — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I saw a painting of President and Sister Hinckley on (you guessed it) black velvet this summer at the fair in Provo. It took me a couple seconds to decide whether to laugh or cry. (I opted for laughing, long and hard.)

By: brayden

brayden — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Nothing is more disturbing than paying twelve bucks to attend a Christmas concert of Michael McLean’s The Forgotten Carols and then finding one’s self surrounded by crying young people who are holding hands and singing their little hearts out. I thought I’d died and woken up in a Dallas Christian revival. Never again.

By: William Morris

William Morris — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

One of the highlights of a trip down the California coast with my priest’s quorum was stepping into a small shop in Tijuana and seeing up on the wall just below Elvis and next to Janet Jackson, a black velvet painting of Joseph Smith.

The Hinckleys on black velvet is just plain weird — mainly because they are still alive [and old people just don't work on black velvet, imo], but Joseph Smith fit among all the other iconic figures — James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, Madonna. There’s bad Mormon kitsch and good Mormon kitsch. I’d say a black velvet painting of the Prophet Joseph is good Mormon kitsch.