Reader's Ink discussion
Lonely Polygamist
>
Question #3
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Meghan
(new)
Jun 01, 2012 09:22PM

reply
|
flag
Good Question Meghan...I was thinking about that too.
When you think of all the crises that occurred throughout the book in my opinion, I feel that he wanted to do a study using polygamy, but to study how a family handles some really serious situations that a family could have whether a polygamist or not.
When you think of all the crises that occurred throughout the book in my opinion, I feel that he wanted to do a study using polygamy, but to study how a family handles some really serious situations that a family could have whether a polygamist or not.


In this case, the family did not work, and did not consistently have these elements. The fact that it was a polygamist family only magnified these problems.

Isn't that so true about this book? This book is all about the quantity of family: more children, more wives, more, more, more. It's a materialistic view of family, this concept that more must equal more devout.
In short, I'm with Meghan: this is a critique of family dynamics more than polygamy. I get the feeling that Golden would have been a dysfunctional father even in a monogamous marriage.
I agree with Carol--I think Udall did more of a study of polygamy than a critique. It almost had an ethnographic approach. Overall, the novel was a study of family, and polygamy was the hook, if not the gimick.
Lauren, you have an interesting take on the big families as a religiously sanctioned "more more more!" I think there's a lot of truth in that, in some cases. Meet the Duggars comes to mind!
Lauren, you have an interesting take on the big families as a religiously sanctioned "more more more!" I think there's a lot of truth in that, in some cases. Meet the Duggars comes to mind!
Thanks Ashley. I've enjoyed all the many comments, yet similarities our comments have. Seems there are some definitive threads we've mostly stuck to and mostly agree upon.