Talking with Lou

[SteelBlue]

Two points to the first person who recognizes who Lou really is.

It's quite obvious. And I liked it, it was interesting.

[RobinFinderson]

I like the fact that he MADE something, but think his conception of 'evil' needs a bit more work.

AA, why don't you try to articulate what evil/Lou is without the art? Right now Lou looks more like a veiled smearing of Rambam. If anything, he is impressive in the totality of his benign wickedness. If Lou is the face of evil, this world is a much better place than anyone here thinks.

Also, Lou doesn't fit traditional Mormon Lucifer cosmology. Satan is an active figure in LDS tradition, not a mere 'watcher' and sideline commentator. This Lou is way more likely to spend too much time on CUF than to rule evil minions (or maybe VBulletin is how Satan organizes his minions these days... either that or Facebook).

I got so caught up in the excitement of your MAKING something that I missed the obvious Lou=Lucifer connection (the teacher in me wants to encourage making before evaluating the work). But Lou needs work!

[kccougar]

Very nice, AA. If you didn't get the Lou reference it's been too long since you were in the temple

[The Rambam]

When Paul Newman died his good friend David Letterman did a video montage tribute and then said something like this (my paraphrase): Paul Newman figured out what it is we human beings should be doing down here on this planet--taking care of other human beings.

I thought it was one of the simplest and most straightforward statements of truth I have ever heard.

For those who don't know, Paul Newman gave over 100 million to charity during his life. Because he viewed his wealth and success as an unfair and unearned gift (the blue eyes, avoiding death in WWII by a fluke happening, his unlikely quick success as an actor, his unlikely longevity as an actor, the total fluke creation of a major foods business) he funneled most of his charity towards those unfairly disadvantaged through no fault of their own--sick and dying kids. His Hole in the Wall camps lack the ornate landscaping and live music of Temple Square but are unquestionably closer to Joseph Smith's idea of Zion.

When it is all done, little will be asked about philosophical positions or ideological dogmatic beliefs. Much will depend, I believe, on how we treated others, cared for others, loved others--especially others who do not look like us or think like us or "deserve" it.

The Satan in your story is right about everything but one thing--agency. Satan's vision in your story is in fact God's vision, only the means of obtaining that vision differ. Your story wrongly seems to paint the goal of an egalitarian society as satanic--it isn't. Only Satan's means are objectional. Wanting all to return; wanting all to be cared for; wanting none to suffer--these are the essence of empathy and charity--the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

[All-American]

I like the fact that he MADE something, but think his conception of 'evil' needs a bit more work.

AA, why don't you try to articulate what evil/Lou is without the art? Right now Lou looks more like a veiled smearing of Rambam. If anything, he is impressive in the totality of his benign wickedness. If Lou is the face of evil, this world is a much better place than anyone here thinks.

Also, Lou doesn't fit traditional Mormon Lucifer cosmology. Satan is an active figure in LDS tradition, not a mere 'watcher' and sideline commentator. This Lou is way more likely to spend too much time on CUF than to rule evil minions (or maybe VBulletin is how Satan organizes his minions these days... either that or Facebook).

I got so caught up in the excitement of your MAKING something that I missed the obvious Lou=Lucifer connection (the teacher in me wants to encourage making before evaluating the work). But Lou needs work!

I didn't even think of Rambam from beginning to end of this. It's no smearing.

And no, Lou doesn't fit traditional Mormon Lucifer cosmology. That's half the point. If he knocked on your door in finery and spoke to you in a booming, operatic voice, you'd know right away what was going on and you'd steer clear forthwith. He's going to be a lot more clever than to show up as exactly what we'd expect him to be, doing exactly what we'd expect him to do.

Rather than reveal himself in all his evil power, he shows up as a sympathetic character. He shows that he is no ordinary street person, that he is most decisively out of place, creating a paradox that a curious passerby will need to resolve. He claims to merely observe the people to create the impression that he is harmless. Most importantly, he doesn't tell a single lie; not where his fraud will be easily detected. Lou preys upon real imperfections to paint a distorted picture. Lou is not the father of lies; he's the father of misrepresentation.

You're right; Lou isn't your everyday devil. Nobody's going to give any credence to a boogeyman in red pajamas. It's an up-to-date version peculiarly suited to the 21st century. He's slippery, he's respectable, he's sympathetic, and most of all, he's RIGHT.

[creekster]

Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But what's puzzling you
Is the nature of my game

whoo whoo

[Jeff Lebowski]

When Paul Newman died his good friend David Letterman did a video montage tribute and then said something like this (my paraphrase): Paul Newman figured out what it is we human beings should be doing down here on this planet--taking care of other human beings.

I thought it was one of the simplest and most straightforward statements of truth I have ever heard.

Thanks for that. Paul Newman was a good man.

[RobinFinderson]

AA, if the only difference between your Satan and a Saint is a dogmatic view of agency, as The Rambam points out, then your Satan doesn't really bring much to the table. Indeed, if most LDS are preternaturally predisposed to oppose Satan, this kind of story might inspire complacency.

[TripletDaddy]

I don't know if nobody is seeing it, or if nobody is saying it, but Lou is NOT a street person.

Two points to the first person who recognizes who Lou really is.

isn't it Lucifer? I read your thing as a ripoff of Screwtape.

[All-American]

The Satan in your story is right about everything but one thing--agency. Satan's vision in your story is in fact God's vision, only the means of obtaining that vision differ. Your story wrongly seems to paint the goal of an egalitarian society as satanic--it isn't. Only Satan's means are objectional. Wanting all to return; wanting all to be cared for; wanting none to suffer--these are the essence of empathy and charity--the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Yes, he does conveniently leave out that little detail, doesn't he? Typical.

AA, if the only difference between your Satan and a Saint is a dogmatic view of agency, as The Rambam points out, then your Satan doesn't really bring much to the table. Indeed, if most LDS are preternaturally predisposed to oppose Satan, this kind of story might inspire complacency.

I would hardly expect any other reaction. Certainly Mr. Brown didn't give him a whole lot of credit.

The most important part of the story is what happens after Lou leaves, and how Mr. Brown is affected by the exchange. There could be a number of different outcomes, but I see them fit into three general categories. I should think that only a very small percentage of us, if any, would be so swayed by Lou's argument that we would consider the Church to be the evil institution that Lou suggests. There may be quite a bit more of us that would recognize some of the true principles that Lou is arguing, and start to question other principles that the church teaches.

I believe the most common reaction is the one Robin points out: members of the church would recognize who's making the argument and reject it. Whichever side Satan is on, LDS will be on the other. Therefore, he doesn't try to win you over to his side so much as he tries to blur the line. As Rambam points out, he makes true and righteous principles seem satanic. If he can influence somebody to accept two truths and reject a third, he's won.

It's not so much a battle of being on the right side of the line anymore. It's about being able to discern where that line lies.