Moonday

12/16/24

Hello all,

I'd like to open with an explanation of where the word "Monday" comes from, because it's fairly interesting.

Apparently, Greco-Roman people decided that there ought to be seven days in a week somewhere between the 1st and 3rd centuries. They named the days after the observable celestial bodies at the time: the sun, the moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn. People fought about the order of the days for a long time, and we've found evidence for an official treatise asking what the order was, but we don't know what they decided was correct. Keep in mind that the sun and moon had different names and therefore resulted in different prefixes for the days (sol- and lun-).

Of course, the Romans lived a very long time ago. Their language evolved many times since they wandered the earth, but it did give rise to the Romance language family. These languages (with a couple exceptions) kept the Roman names. In French, these are dimanche, lundi, mardi, mercredi, jeudi, vendredi, and samedi. As you can see, they correspond with the names of the gods perfectly... except one. Luna, Mars, Mercury, J(e)upiter, Venus. But what about Sunday? Well, when Christianity/Judaism came along, they decided one day should be named after Judeo-Christian god, Dieu. Hence Dimanche. If you speak Spanish, you'll find similar connections.

English is self-decidedly special, so obviously couldn't keep the Roman gods. You know what makes way more sense? The Norse gods! We named our Germanic English names after the corresponding Norse gods: Tyr, (W)Odin, Thor, and Frigg. We thought that Zeus had something to do with thunder and lightning, so we picked Thor to replace him. As in Thursday. I bet you didn't know that. 

You can look up Saturday. It might have come from Saturn, but that one's more complicated.

I was talking to a friend today and realized that a fairly constant theme in my life has been learning by non-example. I've been surrounded by good people, but I've also been exposed to some people who were not good examples for the role they were in. Someone can be a great person in one context, but in the position you have to interact with them in, they are not good. I think that part of overcoming dislike for a person is to meet them in other environments.

Here is a brief, case-in-point example that we can all probably relate to: seeing someone from church, work, or school in public. You don't expect to see them that way, so at first you hardly recognize them. They're wearing clothes you're not used to, they are probably with someone you don't know, they're maybe more pleasant and seemingly normal. Just like the days of the week, you thought you knew them, but they're different. If you meet someone and think, "man, I really don't like this person as Wednesday", meet them as Mercredi and see what happens. Easier said than done.

Sometimes people make stupid choices that affect you, and you don't want to see the good side of them. They might not want you to see it either. Fortunately, you can still learn from them. I've seen examples of terrible leadership, so I know how to better lead. I've seen bad instances of friendship, so I can be a better friend.

Don't take this the wrong way. I don't know if I agree with the whole "noble suffering" ideology. Sometimes suffering and misfortune just happens, and there isn't anything else about it. I don't think that negative circumstances are earned, nor do I think people should constantly worry about being perfect to avoid the "infliction" of negative things. Neither should they place themselves in places of suffering or struggle just for the sake of doing it, especially when they begin to expect others to do the same.

If Jesus Christ really felt all of our pains, it seems like one of our first priorities would be to avoid unnecessary, self-inflicted suffering as a favor to him, so that he wouldn't feel it. I won't pretend to know how that works with agency if he already felt what he did, but I like to think he just felt infinity, which meant each individual experience was somewhere in there. I'd like to identify and relate more to his joy than his pain, personally. Maybe that's just me though.

Thinking about this in regards to my experience with a mission is interesting, and I've had some thought-provoking discussions about it. My mission felt like it had a culture where the suffering was embraced. Things were intentionally made more difficult, as if the struggle brought the results more value somehow. Hypothetically, you could get 10 numbers on 2 different days, one where you were friendly and went out for 1 hour, or one where you gave impersonal invitations for 6. Somehow, the one where you were out for 6 was seen as more impressive and more valuable. I thought that was silly. Someone I was talking to pointed this out: we seem to have a collective idea that if we can say "I told 5 people about the church", it is somehow better than if we helped 1 person with their groceries. It is as if our "efforts" are put into some kind of accounting sheet where things are worth more if they are inconvenient or difficult for either us or the person we are interacting with, as though saying "I told 10 people" is better than actually helping 1. I don't believe in doing things that way, and I see where the frustration of many less-orthodox church members comes from. There is a focus on results, but only results that come out of a certain process done in a certain way. 

I am going to repeat something that I found helpful this week. I might catch some shade for it, but I'm used to that by now. I cannot remember who said the original quote that got me thinking about this, so I can't attribute it to anyone, but the proto-idea came from a high ranking church leader.

Religions- specifically the LDS faith in this particular case- are good for setting up systems. They put lives on good tracks and can help those who are struggling to find direction and move out of dark places. They can help straighten out people who would otherwise negatively affect others, they can teach good morals, and they can teach a person how to feel a sense of community. They should be providing ways for people to practice being good people and teaching each other what they have learned. During youth, this isn't completely good or bad. It can have lasting effects, sometimes negative ones, but it can also make a positive impact by providing good life advice and shaping early decisions (sometimes through less than ideal means) that can benefit the individual later. In a young adult, it can provide a template for getting married, starting a family, and continuing to live within the dynamic they are a part of. 

When it comes to the individual, what should the goal of such a religion be? They should not be seeking to take control, money, or time from the individual. The role of religion is to shape the person to become better by teaching them good morals, a sense of right and wrong, an attitude of service, temperance, empathy for others, and a responsibility to seek beneficial change in the world. If the religion was successful, there should come a time in the person's life when they do not need the religion to tell them what to do anymore in order to be good. The religion should have taught them to do that on their own; it should be such a central part of them that it is no longer a separate identity, it is their central identity. Beyond that, their participation becomes more of a teaching role, helping the younger generation feel their support without taking a direct participatory position. This can come at any time.

One example of this comes to mind: Kung Fu Panda 4. If you've kept up with these films, you know that Po (Jack Black) is the fabled Dragon Warrior, chosen to save the country from the evil masters of kung fu. In the 4th installment, a disgruntled Po must relinquish his legendary status and move to a more mythical wisdom type leader, teaching a young fox (with the horrendous voice of Awkwafina) all he has learned in his time as the Dragon Warrior.

We each get a chance to be the Dragon Warrior; we are the center of the legend. We have birthday parties, we get married, we have kids. Part of being in the spotlight is stepping away. If you've learned what being a Dragon Warrior could teach you, then you should move on to the next step for you. For Po, that was the wisdom master. If I knew what it was for you, I'd be like Oogway as a wisdom master myself. All I know is that "when life gives you lemons, make pear juice and blow everybody's minds."

If you haven't seen the movies, then that made no sense to you. Go watch them. It is your homework, young ones.

I'd make a great wisdom master.

I think that's about it for me this week. Ask me what happened to the Honda Pilot if you're interested. In case you're wondering, the Cheesecake Factory doesn't have any vegan options for dessert, except a Cobb salad, and if you want to be entertained for 3 minutes, search YouTube for Snow Treasure Rap to see my sister's epic book report (majority of work done by yours truly). I'm continuing French at BYU, I have to take way too many math and physics classes, and I am in desperate search of a place to live. Praise the FAFSA.

I'll see you all next week!

Willard

ps. Sorry it's late. I was distracted today by other things.

I am not the Music Man

12/9/24

I recently learned that my emails are a hit with a certain A3 physics class at Timpanogos High School, taught by a certain intelligent, unnamed teacher. Shout out to those guys. If you think being a missionary is hard work, you have not taken AP Physics 1. I avoided that class, opting instead for AP Physics C back in the day. Calculus makes physics a little easier, probably because it was invented to do just that. Anyways, this email is not sponsored by the Advanced Placement program. Or maybe it is. You'll never know.

I have become employed again. For the second time, I will be doing employer engagement and recruiter experience for the Office of Careers and Experiential Learning at BYU. They were happy to have me back (thanks Beth) and I was happy to go back. This week I figured out how to automate a job report because I was too future-lazy to want to do it manually every time. It was so worth it, assuming it works.

I have to register for classes again. In the comments below, let me know what I should major in! Just kidding. Engineering saps a heck of a lot of time; I want to take cool classes like math or songwriting or film or something, but engineering doesn't let you because there are too many classes to take in order to graduate in the program. Maybe I'll speedrun a math degree and then do engineering at the graduate level. Or some AI company will hire my mathematics to help them take over the world.

A current set of themes in my life at the moment are the arts. I went to see 2 more productions this week: my sisters performed in The Nutcracker and my mom's cousin played the lead role in a community theater performance of The Music Man. I will talk about my sisters first because they are more important, I guess, and because I have less to say.

The Nutcracker was a 1 hour, 30 minute performance of a classic ballet. I was sad to see the unhealthy weight of the main character, Clara. Homegirl was like 12 years old and thought she needed to be thinner than a reed. I am sure ballet had something to do with that. Hazel performed with a younger girl who was maybe 4, and she said that the girl fell asleep on her lap after she went on. I guess waving her hands was too exhaustive. 

(Before I talk about The Music Man, I'd like to mention that Violet asked me today if I was ever embarrassed of my car. I just said "it's better than no car." Don't tell her the answer was yes and is about 15% of the reason I do not talk to young women.)

The Music Man was written by Meredith Willson and premiered on Broadway in 1957. Set in River City, Iowa, a clever con man Harold Hill arrives to sell brass instruments and uniforms. He plants rumors in the town about pool halls fostering all kinds of bad behavior in boys and girls, then suggests that a brass band might be just what the town needs to save them from their demise. He makes himself the band director, much to the dismay of Marian Paroo, the librarian (actually inspired by Marian Seeley, a medical records librarian from Provo, UT), who already teaches piano. She figures he is a fraud and sees right through his bogus degree and flashy grin, but when her younger socially reclusive brother Winthrop becomes excited about joining a band, she holds out a little longer. In true Broadway fashion, she develops feelings for him, and when the town realizes he isn't actually a band director and plans to leave town before the instruments even arrive, she defends him. Just in the nick of time, the instruments arrive and the children don their uniforms to play a horrendous rendition of Minuet in G. Despite its grating nature, the parents are enraptured and are happy to see their children in the band.

Now that you've read a quick summary, I can talk about the part that had immense rhetorical value for me.

Just before the instruments arrive and the townspeople are going to do awful things to Hill for taking their money, an enraged Mayor Shinn asks a particularly poignant question to Hill: "Where's the band? Where's the band?!" All these people expect something. They have been promised a band; they've invested time, money, and a whole lot of hope into something that never existed. The fact that they wanted it to be true didn't change the fact that Harold Hill was not a band director and that the children had no idea how to play instruments. It didn't change that all Hill was after originally was money. Hill also claimed to have developed the "THINK Method", a musical system that involves only thinking about the notes and how you would play them if you could without ever touching the instrument. 

The result of this fraud was still a band, albeit a terrible one. The people were still so happy to see their children proud of themselves and part of something bigger than themselves. They were even willing to forgive Hill for taking exorbitant amounts of money and planning to skip town at the first chance he got.

Watching the play did not make me like Hill. I thought he wasn't a very good guy, always advancing on Marian. He didn't give the people their money back and he still seemed ingenuine. Despite his nature, the people defended him because of what he gave them, even though he had never planned for it to be real in the first place.

Perhaps it has to do with recent events, but I immediately thought of the early LDS Church and the Great Enlightenment period. What band were they promised? They were promised eternal life and a blessed existence. The promised land became their promised band as they traveled west under some slightly shady leaders. In a way, Hill was what I would expect Joseph Smith to look like. 

Let me write a disclaimer. I am in no way implying anything about the truthfulness of the gospel of Christ or the actual veracity of the Book of Mormon or the life of Christ or any of that... so don't misconstrue my intent. I am comparing the people, places, and circumstances. After all, there were real uniforms and real instruments.

Hill was not a great guy by most standards. He provided himself much adulation. He was highly self-serving. He believed he alone had the ability to convince River City to join his band. If I dare argue, the founder of our church was not particularly virtuous either. In 1843, Emma Smith burned a manuscript copy of the revelation now in D&C 132, after saying it seemed pretty contrary to what had already been established. Joseph then produced the aforementioned revelation that stated it was okay, and she pretty much said, "Yeah, right," and burned it. 

Hill's pushiness reminded me of the "Happiness Letter". This letter was dictated after Smith proposed to a then 19 year old Nancy Rigdon in the locked upper floor of the Red Brick Store. Without context, this letter contains fairly good advice. With context, it's pretty terrible.

Why am I telling you this? If you read those paragraphs without any explanation, you'd probably think, "wow, this guy hates the church and he is starting to embrace some pretty antagonistic stuff". You would be incorrect on both fronts. I am trying to convey the point that it isn't a bad idea to consider things. These things did happen, and a pretty successful global organization came out of it. Although Hill was pretty awful, he did produce a band. He did give everyone instruments and uniforms and help them feel like they were really a part of a band. Was it as pretty and grand and flawless as he said it would be? No. Not at all. In fact, it was pretty horrible. When the Saints headed west to Utah, was anything good? Again, no. I daresay it was worse than the band. However, they did get land and the freedom to worship how they wanted. The children of River City did get shiny brass instruments. It made them feel like they had really done something.

What band are we promised individually? What flawless, golden life are we assured we can have, so long as we (and our families and friends) keep our covenants and stay in line? If you are or ever have been a part of the church, you know exactly what I'm talking about. When the person next to you plays a flat instead of a sharps, it sounds with the whole band, your whole band. Suddenly things aren't so fair. "My band sounds bad," you'd think. If I could get you to realize anything, it is that you aren't supposed to have the band. It's just you and your instrument. If one can play their part well because they practiced and made it meaningful, they've done everything they could. 

Indulge me for a minute and hear me out the other part of my metaphor. Your band is your life, but you only have two hands and one mouth. You can't play all the instruments. One must play what you can get behind as best they can with what they've learned from the other instruments in their band and encourage them to play as best they can. It is not your job to play the saxophone; you are a trumpet player. Realize that even though it is your band, it isn't your band, and that your only job is to get as good as you can at playing your trumpet, tuba, or euphonium. Maybe you are a Lutheran clarinet, or a Roman Orthodox oboe, or a Hindustani sitar. Do that as best you can. If you find yourself better suited to trombone, that's fine! Be a little bit better father, brother, sister, friend, or companion. Every player needs rhythm, that's universal. Every person needs kindness, regardless of creed. Some people might have felt out of place in the band, so maybe they took up painting instead. That's fine too. They can still make something beautiful. You can't compare it with a flute solo because they just aren't the same substance, but they can approach similar levels of dedication and mastery.

Even though Hill wasn't a good guy, he started a band. The band made people feel like they were a part of something. Maybe he learned how to be a good person later because of the band. We don't know. We don't get that part of the story. Where is your band? Well, it's here, right now.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is why you ought to engage with plays, books, art, and scripture. It can teach things that you might never learn otherwise. It is also why I like my flip phone. Instead of ogling at a glass box, I thought about what I'd just watched. Cool, isn't it?

Excuse my use of the second person point of view throughout this email. It felt appropriate to address the audience.

I hope you enjoyed reading this. I enjoy writing them. If you have any topics you'd like me to say something about next week, let me know! I can answer just you, or, if you think it would be something that everyone ought to consider, I might anonymously toss your question in my weekly email. Send me something and what you want me to do with it.

Of course, I love hearing from all of you anyways, regardless of what it's about. Send me an update or something.

I feel like I'm forgetting something... but I don't remember what it is.

Those are my thoughts as of late. I'd love to know what you think.

Your friendly neighborhood Employer Engagement Specialist,

Will Ott

"Life is like a Honda Pilot..." - Forrest Gump

12/2/24

I almost forgot to write something today, but then my joint heir reminded me. You have him to thank for today's content. I have officially returned to the land of the free: Lindon, UT. I arrived Wednesday evening, ate dinner, and promptly went to sleep. I awoke and surprised my siblings for Thanksgiving at my pop's, because they had no idea what happened. It was nice to see them again; I missed the children a lot.

Picture a Honda Pilot. Now picture it in ugly 2000s automobile gold-ish tan. The interior is held together by the atomic attractive forces between dirt molecules. The outside looks like the budget version of Iron Man's mask. This is my car. When I went to start it to drive back to mi madre's, it didn't start. I expected this. We jumped the battery and I drove it to a gas station, where the battery promptly died. I jumped it again and drove it home. I thought twice and backed it into the driveway in case the battery died again. I turned it off and the battery died again. I borrowed a battery charger, added power steering fluid (power steering works now, I think), and replaced the dysfunctional wiper blades. It drives and major systems are working. I need to sell that car. If anyone wants to buy a... on second thought, you don't.

Apparently the bishop in the YSA I was serving in rounded up the new missionaries in the ward and basically told them to get their act together and fix everything because he didn't want missionaries in the ward. I still don't like that guy much.

I went to sacrament meeting in my home ward. It was a little weird, 'cause it kinda felt like everybody was staring at me. Nobody said anything, but I stopped to say hello to my Sunday School teacher and she said some things that were good for me to hear. I escaped the hour unscathed and went to meet with my stake president. The meeting was fine. It was not uncaring and accusatory like my last few meetings.

I have to find things to keep myself busy or I go crazy. Music is a good one; I want to try to finish a song and post that sucker to Spotify. I 3D printed a clone trooper helmet before I left, so I'm painting and finishing that. Any ideas? I'm trying to find cool projects. I think I might make a new kind of picture hanger that I thought of, or a rolling puzzle cover. I don't know. I like coming up with product ideas or things that would make life a little easier. I think I'll draw another portrait soon. Any requests? I need someone recognizable.

I've really liked the book I've been reading, "The Power of Myth". It is a transcription of conversations between Joseph Campbell and Bill Moyers from a PBS documentary shot on Skywalker Ranch, CA, in 1988. Campbell was a leading expert in mythology, and Moyers was a journalist. They tackle many questions and explore different themes present within mythology. Campbell explains how myths often contradict themselves and have multiple themes. There might be 5 myths within a culture and they all contradict each other, so how can they be true? He uses King Arthur as an example: one can appreciate the legends of the Knights of the Round Table without believing they are exactly correct, then points out how religious people often emphasize the belief over the lesson it has. Is the statement of belief more important than the belief itself? That doesn't seem quite right to me.

I like this way of thinking because it addresses much harder questions. For example, we believe Joseph Smith was a prophet because of the Book of Mormon. However, he also practiced plural marriage (or attempted to practice it) which we now recognize as wrong. We can sit and say "oh, we have to trust God and his ways", or we can say "what's more important, the lessons or the events themselves?" What's more important about the Book of Mormon: the words and events that occured or the lessons they teach? I'm gonna go with the lessons. Even if it was all made up, you can still say that good lessons can be found in the teachings. We have changed lots of things in our church in the last 40 years, many of which were claimed to be exact. However, the lessons underneath those things should still be the same. Some very central parts of our religion came from what was going on at the time. Standing on a box and literally proclaiming repentance to people probably worked great in the Great Enlightenment period, but it wouldn't work so well today. I can attest to that statement.

Does each detail have to be exactly correct to lend value to the overall message? Ask Copernicus. The geocentric model of the solar system was popular until Copernicus realized that a heliocentric model more accurately described the heavens above. Giordano Bruno was executed for teaching this model in the year 1600. He also taught that the universe was infinite. The Catholic church was incredibly against this view at the time because it meant there was not a single place for heaven, and God couldn't reside at a single physical location. This also meant there was no physical hell, which was working great as a way to keep people from stepping out of line. However, it is clear that the heliocentric view and the infinite nature of the universe are true. The geocentric view was a necessary step on the path towards understanding. How does that apply to the church? How does that apply to your development in emulating the things that Christ stands for? There are steps. As a person figures out what really matters and how to treat other people and how to get more from their life through their actions, they are completing those steps. As the church changes things little by little, we hope that they move in a direction closer to what is true. Doesn't mean that they will, but we hope so. It is each person's responsibility to learn things in context and to understand what exactly is going on so that they can go out and teach other people what they've learned about helping other people and bettering their own lives.

Part of the power of being human is the ability to hold multiple perspectives at a time. You can choose to be offended by something someone says about the church, or you can listen. You can find out exactly why that is claimed and evaluate how it fits in with your understanding. It isn't apostasy to consider other perspectives or to look into your questions. I think part of the reason so many people have these huge 'faith crises' is because they have been taught in a way that ignored context for so long. When something finally comes that they can't ignore or can't dismiss, they suddenly question their entire basis. If they had been taught in context the whole time, they'd be able to appreciate the good and recognize the bad. This is why I find it so critical to learn in context. If you don't, you just set yourself up for disappointment later. This is true in everything: the gospel, politics, science, life, etc. You must learn lessons in context. It is the context that gives them power.

Context is the reason why my MTC group was so close. We were open with what got us to where we were. I recall one night in which we each shared something hard we had overcome. We learned that while we had slightly different contexts, we had gone through very similar things. Context fuels exigence, and exigence gives weight to a situation. I noticed that as each person shared the person they used to be, I could contrast it with the person that sat beside me, and it made them that much more impressive. With context, almost everyone becomes a hero. It also explained some of my questions about each of them. Why are they a certain way? Why do they behave like that? Context. Context explained the negatives in a way that didn't damage my view of the person.

I spent way too long writing this. I'm gonna go to bed now.

Goodnight.

Will Ott