So, I have to confess that as a result, I rarely (if ever) visited the church’s website for non-members (at mormon.org). I thought it would be much of the same, and I thought I’d have to be a little embarrassed for it.

…but just a few days ago, the LDS Newsroom (another church site I rarely check…grr, I’m so bad!) announced that Mormon.org had gotten a facelift. I don’t know about you, but I am in awe. Click the image (or here) to jump to it!

I think the church has been trying to change its image for a while (and some of our friends in the Bloggernacle have discussed whether outside coverage on shifting Mormon perceptions is changing the average person’s viewpoint), but it’s had some misses. For example, it rang in 2009 with a new site for church youth (which [fortunately] has been quietly scuttled away, as far as I can tell — but you can still check out the video here), a site that oozed with pop and total radicality.

But for the new Mormon.org…I could be wrong…but it seems that the years of research into design, psychology, and current awareness of Mormonism paid off. You can read a fascinating account of the development of the new site here.

Here are just a few of my favorite aspects of the site.

Integration of Our People

From the first page (and even the picture that I posted), you can see that the designers of the new Mormon.org wanted people to hear regular (even if particularly attractive, talented) members. But what particularly intrigued me was the Our People page itself, where anyone can search for member testimonies and profiles by ethnicity, continent, age, gender, or even religious background. One goal of the designers at North Temple’s was to improve the perceptions of Mormons — especially of the diversity of the church membership — and I certainly think that this site has been a good step here.

Even more, member perspectives are integrated elsewhere throughout the site. Take for example the FAQ. Each topic has, in addition to the official church response, responses from various members. I’m certain that there is a certain vetting process to make sure that everything is kosher, but even in some touchy questions, there are touching, if seemingly surprising answers. (One woman answers the question regarding the church’s position on homosexuality and gay marriage by pointing out that the church does not support same-sex marriage, but does support families. She notes this has allowed her to support her mother, who is a lesbian, and her partner.)

Emphasis on Our Values

As someone who doesn’t have a testimony of every aspect of the faith, I could still be on board with the presentation of church values. The new mormon.org presents these values in such a way that most people can easily find agreement, but it does not try to present these values in a completely sterile and neutral way. The site successfully incorporates LDS perspectives, scriptures, and quotations so that they are not overbearing, but in a way that a non-member of the site could see that the church does have vibrant positions.

For example, the page on LDS valuation of freedom of choice conveys both the LDS position of official political neutrality and the LDS position of standing up for its valued moral positions. I understand that this interplay is often a raw point for some, but the site gracefully handles it.

Employment of Colors

Recently, another one of our brethren in the Bloggernacle listed the several “V” words that he found to be integral to true religion. His terms were an emotional onomatopoeia of life, love, and learning. Two words he used were verdant and vibrant — words that evoke a sense of richness to color.

This has not been lost or forgone with the new Mormon.org. I must admit that I am not a formal designer, and I am not a color psychologist, but as someone who can see and feel, I see vitality and hope from this very site. I can see some who might be skeptical — “it is just marketing; it is just pushing buttons.” But what about the fantastic art of the Renaissance? The heaven-reaching architecture? The divine melodies of the music?

I guess I’m not saying that this is the new masterpiece, but in the same way that effective design principles have always been used for emotional and spiritual direction and amplification, I feel like this site is a modern paradigm.

So, what do you think? Am I totally off the mark? Do you think that this will have any effect on nonmembers’ perceptions?

I can’t even begin to comprehend it all, but I am fortunate for the glimpse and expose that Scott B is providing for it.

One thing I can’t help but think about is the sheer artistic nature of this undertaking. It is literary, first and foremost…and from the beginning, the project objectives bore innovative literary significance. As was described in the project objectives (hidden away from the general public for so long):

…our number one aim—beyond just having fun—with this project is to explore the potential of blogging as a story-telling form.  More specifically, we want to explore blogging as a way of telling Mormon stories, and more specifically than that we want to tell stories that reflect back on the bloggernacle itself.

Of course, in the process, the project needed to be much more. Blogs aren’t static, but interactive. And with that, the Banner of Heaven project became more performative, social, experimental, and experiential.

I cannot even begin to understand the charged feelings and responses to the blog, because I wasn’t “there” for it. Yet, in seeing all the discussion about BoH after the fact, I always see a kind of damage control relating to the subject.

One idea that comes out frequently is that of deception. Was it deception? Was that the intent? Was that an unfortunate consequence? A known, yet calculated risk? What does that say about the participating bloggers (the actors)? I think the latest entry on the subject, which features a podcast interview of one of the participating bloggers, touches a few intriguing points. As one commenter to the thread sums up:

The one telling thing on this podcast is Rosalynde’s unwillingness to act deceptively. She was the only one who with the foresight to recognize how people were going to react to being tricked. They all knew she had misgivings about it, and forged on regardless with their grand enterprise. From this podcast it doesnt sound like her withdrawl resulted in any internal soul-searching or discussion with the rest of them.

People’s perceptions of whats funny sure is different.

I guess that psychological aspect running through it all is the most intriguing. Within this comment, I sense an undertone…a lingering disgust that carries with it a sort of judgment of the participating writers.

Yet, the fascinating part is I bet that many would still assert that there wasn’t any intent to deceive and, even now, the project wasn’t really as bad as some people would like to believe.

I certainly feel, even from a distance, that good, bad, or indifferent, this project made a big splash on the story of Mormonism (and the story of Mormon blogging). In fact, it is precisely because of the good and the bad and the indifferent that this makes such a great Mormon story.

I regret that the limitations of analogies for this project are unfortunately fatal. At best, it can tell us about a community built around a knowing untruth, but how far can that tell either a story about the real bloggernacle or Mormonism itself without making or taking taboo and unpalatable assumptions about either the former or the latter?

There are a few reasons for this. If I went into all of them, I would end up wasting lots of space here, but the short answer is, their record labels don’t take kindly to them yapping about religion all the time, and the Mormon community doesn’t seem incredibly interested in financially supporting music that emotionally challenges them. I could lament this last bit, too, but that’s not my intention in this series.

I’ve decided to write a series highlighting, one at a time, the Top 10 LDS musicians I’ve encountered all around the world. This isn’t meant to be all-inclusive of course, I might end up having more than just 10, and I make no claims to objectivity. These are just my all-time favorites. Each one is unique and special. I’m proud to say that these musicians would be in my playlist even if they weren’t LDS, and that’s the great thing about these people.  So now, without further ado…

Roxy Rawson

Just a few months after I created Linescratchers and started promoting it, I got an interesting email suggesting that I interview a British violinist, singer, and songwriter named Roxy Rawson. The email was adorned with lavish praise and, of course, written by Roxy’s mother. Now, my own mother thinks my music is really good, proving that sometimes familial ties overcome a person’s rationality and good sense, but lo and behold, when I did a Google search of Roxy’s music I was astonished beyond all measure.

“I started to find my own way to express myself… rather than rendering homage to other peoples’ music… not that that is not a worthy pursuit in music, I think I was looking for my own way. That seemed more important at the time… I don’t think I would have started to write my music in the way it is now, unless I had started on some journey of shedding things I learnt before in my training…” – Roxy Rawson, interview with Linescratchers

Of course, when you ask her, Roxy gives credit where credit is due, but her music really is out-of-the-ordinary in very good ways. She has the most delightful bouncing, yipping vocal style, punctuated with unorthodox pizzicato violin strumming (a very talented violinist, she often eschews the use of her bow and prefers plucking the violin in front of her like a guitar). Her songs are each hand-crafted, with tiny flourishes and quirks to reward the careful listener. And her lyrics are curious word-paintings, with light-hearted references to culture and philosophy, the latter of which she has studied extensively.

“I think yes, a lot of what I write is about escape from earthly things… or wrestling with earthly things and the non-sensicalness? Of life… Often things feel absurd to me…” – Roxy Rawson, interview with Linescratchers

In short, Roxy’s music is a breath of fresh air to anyone who grows weary of factory-made popular music nowadays. I admit, for this reason, her music is not for everyone. Still, Roxy has made enough of an impression to be signed to Ambiguous Records, an independent music label in London, and her uniqueness is attested to by the fact that on her Ambiguous profile page, the only “related artist” they came up with was… Roxy Rawson. Her EP, Changing Things was released by this label in May of last year, and every track is singular and memorable, including “Riddle It” and “Philanthropy.” Here is a short TV performance.

Roxy has spent her life in England, and thus hasn’t spent much time touring the United States. She was able to play a couple shows in New York City last September, and pictures of that trip can be seen on her MySpace. Apparently her live shows are quite a treat. I expect quite a bit more out of Roxy. She’s really only scratched the surface of what appears to be quite a well of talent.

To find out more about Roxy or her music, you can visit her MySpace, her page at Ambiguous Records, or her interview at Linescratchers.

P.S. – Roxy’s mom is super smart and nice

Having served my mission in Ireland, I am familiar with the Catholic iconography that is present in many of their Churches. Having been raised Mormon I am familiar with the critical attitude toward these types of statues and paintings; and yet as I surveyed these works of art, some of them had a real impact upon me. Statues of the lacerated Jesus or of the dying Jesus or the crucified Jesus forced me to hold back tears for fear of embarrassment. Even a bust of the Virgin Mary moved me deeply. I sensed that it is a real loss to Mormon culture that we do not readily engage with these products of devotion.

Much of the LDS art that I have seen of Jesus seems banal and insipid. We see a calm, collected and/or kind Jesus; and yet he is rarely depicted in any of the extremes of suffering or joy that was surely part of the humanity of his life. I am aware of exceptions; but even these pail in insignificance to what these Spanish artists created. I believe that Jesus was, at times calm, collected and kind; but I also believe he experienced the full range of human emotions (good and bad). I believe his model for living was abundance.

More confusing to me is that the LDS ‘Lamb of God’ video is different. It makes an explicit attempt to evoke this type of passionate response in the audience by alluding to the vicious suffering of Jesus. Why is it that film is more acceptable as a means of presenting this kind of devotional material? Is this merely a cultural distinction, an anti-catholic hangover from Nineteenth century America, and if so is it not about time that we extend Priesthood legitimacy to all worthy forms of Art.

Perhaps Eugene England was right when he said that Mormons do not experience the ‘tragic’ as frequently as others because of the success of our religion, but I doubt it.

Yet this raises another question, why do we need to use these different media to help us connected with Jesus and his suffering. Are we more able to sense the visceral reality of his wounds if they are shown to us? Can we more easily believe in the atonement if we can see the suffering of Christ? If this is so, would not these type of ‘passion’ iconography be a useful medium to help latter-day Saints explore their relationship to our Lord?

Perhaps Mormons need to more fully explore the spiritual artistic heritages that are rooted in other faiths as well as trying to promote our own. I certainly feel that my faith has been enriched by some of what our extended Christian heritage has produced.