Jump to content

Trynn's Parodies

  • entries
    14
  • comments
    23
  • views
    2,984

Do the Maxwells Ever Interact With People Under 50?


Trynn

1,439 views

In going through the book A Summer With The Moodys, I have noticed a pattern. My rough drafts that I've been posting are mainly of the Doody's neighbors and acquaintances and how they see the Doodys.

But the thing is, all the characters are too similar. Part of that may be that I'm not really that great at writing (yet), but part of it is that most characters the Doodys interact with in this book are described as being, "elderly," "old," "older man," "grandmotherly," etc.

I know that the Maxwells have a Church of the Holy Nursing Home, but do they never interact with people of different ages? Even the lady at the City Hall is old. Does Sarah truly never interact with anyone under the age of 50, besides her family members?

This is truly annoying. I might have to change some things around just for some variety. Which I'm still learning how to write anyway.

4 Comments


Recommended Comments

Bethella

Posted

I think they interacted with people under the age of 50 back when they had conferences but I don't think they had any this year.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
uber frau

Posted

They do but they don't always write about it.  They've appeared on other funde blogs. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
ILoveJellybeans

Posted

Sometimes, they've met the Duggars, and a few other fundie families, wasn't there a picture with one of Zsu's kids?

 

I think they prefer elderly people though, because what if the "kids" actually made a friend with someone their own age, how scandalous, they might start hanging out with them more than family! They might learn something inappropriate, like nursery rhyme lyrics.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, ILoveJellybeans said:

Sometimes, they've met the Duggars, and a few other fundie families, wasn't there a picture with one of Zsu's kids?

I don't know. I don't keep up with the Duggar wedding threads that closely.

Oh yeah, you're right, I think I do remember a while back they met the Andersons at a conference they were holding, and Miriam took a picture with... I think it was Sarah?

I meant on a regular day to day basis, though. But I suppose you're right, when they used to do conferences.... I don't think there were any last year either.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • keepercjr

      Posted

      8 hours ago, Maggie Mae said:

       

      The field of journalism has changed dramatically. But saying "they work for the rich" and are "sellouts" is so juvenile and lacks any sort of understanding of the state of the industry. 

      Calling people "sellouts" because they took or kept jobs when their peers and colleagues were being laid off is just cruel. It's also not that deep. Not everyone in journalism is into hard-hitting investigative journalism. There are sports writers and sports casters, arts and entertainment, political analysts, anchors, feature writers, food writers, etc. There's a former Attorney General who writes a garden column and occasionally a piece on local politics. I guess he's a "sellout" too, reminding us when to start our peonies and snap peas. 

       

       

      My good friend in high school has had a great career as a sports writer.  He has lived in NY, Honolulu and other places.  Is it hard hitting journalism? No, of course not.  But sports is something that interests people. 

    • noseybutt

      Posted

      3 minutes ago, JermajestyDuggar said:

      I bet there are quite a few changes in the book that they will never publicly admit to. 

      We need a graphic designer to make up a faux literary award for the new cover that acknowledges the number of times it has been entered into evidence in child murder trials.

       

      • Upvote 1
    • JermajestyDuggar

      Posted

      I bet there are quite a few changes in the book that they will never publicly admit to. 

      • Upvote 1
    • noseybutt

      Posted

      4 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

      You are probably correct - as usual, it's about the money and the power. Jesus is a very distant third, if He is in the running at all.

      Nathan Pearl just took over the NGJ business ministries. His daughter Ashley is running the NGJ social media. NGJ is also republishing TTUAC, allegedly a new edition with some changes:

      TTUAC_Newcoversameshit.thumb.png.6952c42bfa40ffc44e225ccb1ad8ebe2.png

       

      Well now. Who is going to take one for the team and compare it to the original?

      Nose goes.

    • hoipolloi

      Posted

      4 minutes ago, noseybutt said:

      Michael Pearl is the cult leader and he will feel the need to pontificate on some bizarre and arcane reasoning when the truth is likely much more logical: he wants to keep the money and the power and the esteem and allowing for occasional divorce makes all that possible. To stay true to the teaching would mean distancing from half of his kids and that would be cruel.

      You are probably correct - as usual, it's about the money and the power. Jesus is a very distant third, if He is in the running at all.

      Nathan Pearl just took over the NGJ business ministries. His daughter Ashley is running the NGJ social media. NGJ is also republishing TTUAC, allegedly a new edition with some changes:

      TTUAC_Newcoversameshit.thumb.png.6952c42bfa40ffc44e225ccb1ad8ebe2.png

       



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.