A Saturday With the Moodys (Maxwells)

[NachosFlandersStyle]

Without books, I'd be nothing but a dry husk of a person.

Because I'm a book addict, I can't imagine where I'd be if I were to have my reading censored like that.

The ban on media and culture is somehow freakier and more unsettling for me to imagine than anything else about their system. I guess that the idea of living under daddy's roof at 30 while I wait for him to arrange my marriage is so distant from my own reality that I can only look at it in a sort of detached way. But when I'm bored I open a book or switch on Netflix or turn on the radio-- and it creeps me out to think that there are real people in America (just a few miles from where my relatives live actually) who don't see that as an option.

They claim to be skilled conversationalists but what the hell do they talk ABOUT? If the excerpts of Sarah's book are any indication, not a whole lot.

[browncoatslytherin]

Do we know he is not an FJ "member?"

stevie boy? i'm pretty sure he has an account here, but if he logs in, we'll be able to see. we know he at least reads here, but he can't read hidden content if he's not logged in. ;)

[sparkles]

The ban on media and culture is somehow freakier and more unsettling for me to imagine than anything else about their system. I guess that the idea of living under daddy's roof at 30 while I wait for him to arrange my marriage is so distant from my own reality that I can only look at it in a sort of detached way. But when I'm bored I open a book or switch on Netflix or turn on the radio-- and it creeps me out to think that there are real people in America (just a few miles from where my relatives live actually) who don't see that as an option.

They claim to be skilled conversationalists but what the hell do they talk ABOUT? If the excerpts of Sarah's book are any indication, not a whole lot.

Their "conversation" is really a bait-and-switch sales pitch and what they're selling is Jesus––and the Maxwell way of life. Every word, every deed, every question is all designed to lead to a discussion of how godly your are (or aren't). It's shady, deceptive and insincere (although they do sincerely believe they're doing you a great service by telling you how useless your life has been and how horrible your death with be since you'll be spending it in HELL without Jesus). Seriously, what else can they talk about? Entertainment? Nope. Literature? Nope. Music? Only their own so nope. Art? Well, Mary does draw some. Food? How much conversation can you squeeze out of a burrito? Politics? Everything they know, someone else tells them. So all you're left with is the Maxwell brand of religion and that's where all conversational roads lead.

[Black Aliss]

Later when he heard the washing machine repairman tell me that our machine was beyond repair, Josiah immediately told me, “Mom, we can do what the Moody family did.†I asked him what that was. “We can pray,†he responded.

C'mon, Maxwell fangirl, don't leave us hanging. How'd that work out for you? I ask because a relative of mine blogged awhile back about how she was praying for a laundry appliance miracle and, lo, a few days later her god sent her a check for a new washing machine. Seems god worked through her step-dad, because step-dad complained that he was still having to subsidize the kid's quiverful lifestyle in order to make sure the grandkids would be okay.

[FloraKitty35]

I think having an English professor review it would be overkill. Honestly, I think any kid who is an avid, precocious reader would find them mind-numbingly dull. And any kid who was getting a truly decent education in how to write in clear, grammatical English, and who was encouraged to read good books, would have no use for them.

I would not consider them suitable reading material for a child precisely because they don't model competent written English. If I had kids, and if I wanted to make sure they learned to write well, why would I give them such a poorly-written book? Why would I allow them to think that was acceptable writing at all, if I took their educations seriously?

It's not a matter of being "godly" or "secular"; Victoria Botkin, after all, educated her own kids to be capable writers. I can pick apart the problems with what the younger Botkins have to say, and their attitudes, but their writing skills are well above average. If either of the Botkinettes turned to writing children's books aimed at the same market niche the Maxwells are trying to please with the Moody series, those stories stand a good chance of at least being competently written. The Botkinettes are as heavily indoctrinated to their parents' religious views as the Maxwell kids, but they were clearly encouraged to read, and read challenging material. They also haven't been cut off from imaginative works of fiction in the name of ideological purity--for crying out loud, they go see Disney flicks, then critique them from their Calvinist perspective! They simply don't inhabit the intellectual, experiential, and imaginative wasteland that Sarah Maxwell does, and the difference is like night and day.

Of course, part of Geoff Botkin's narcissistic ideal for his perfect, obedient, patriocentric family was that they gain power and influence in the wider world, and thus shape politics and culture; education is a vitally important part of that. Steve Maxwell's aims are a lot lower; his narcissistic ideal for his perfect, obedient, patriocentric family is that they never outshine him, so shoddy education combined with ruthlessly stunted intellect and imagination serve his purposes just fine. His kids may acquire practical skills, but he'll always be smarter, more educated, and a clearer thinker than they are, and he wouldn't have it any other way.

The last paragraph could also sum up Jim Bob & Michelle, too. A Botkin son would be a better ambassador for FRC than Smuggar.

[gustava]

The ban on media and culture is somehow freakier and more unsettling for me to imagine than anything else about their system. I guess that the idea of living under daddy's roof at 30 while I wait for him to arrange my marriage is so distant from my own reality that I can only look at it in a sort of detached way. But when I'm bored I open a book or switch on Netflix or turn on the radio-- and it creeps me out to think that there are real people in America (just a few miles from where my relatives live actually) who don't see that as an option.

They claim to be skilled conversationalists but what the hell do they talk ABOUT? If the excerpts of Sarah's book are any indication, not a whole lot.

The Maxwells are never bored; they wash cabinets instead.

[Flamingosandswans]

As an aside, in the latest 'Merry Christmas' post I would say that Sarah looks rather pretty. Is it just me, or could she be wearing what some might call makeup?

I was wondering too, do we know if that's against the rules in Maxhell?

[SPHASH]

As an aside, in the latest 'Merry Christmas' post I would say that Sarah looks rather pretty. Is it just me, or could she be wearing what some might call makeup?

I was wondering too, do we know if that's against the rules in Maxhell?

I wonder who took the family pic, there is an extra chair at the table. John courting?

[Jana814]

I've read the Moody books, when reading them (cause Sarah said she got ideas from her childhood) it bothered me that this was how they were raised.

[sparkles]

The camera was probably on a timer. I don't think there's an empty chair. Both Christopher and John are crouched down next to the kids so that's why the chairs are vacant.

Sarah and those damned bows...

[AllisonWndrland]

I really dislike the hair bows, but I want the rest of Sarah's outfit. I wouldn't wear them together, but I like all the pieces separately.

It's interesting that Sarah is actually included in a family photo for a change. She's not often in the big family photos. She is also prominent in several recent blog photos that don't involve her appearing behind the camera in a mirror.... Are you getting nervous, Steve? Need to get Sarah courting and hitched soon?

[gardenvarietycitizen]

I don't think they are allowed to read just for fun.

"Fun" means you're not actively pursuing your "goals" so possibly not.

However, if they can make reading be a form of studying, I think they'd allow it. The main problem is more insidious - the Maxwells aren't allowed to read books that are unsuitable, and for them, "unsuitable" includes having ANY examples of either "untruth" OR bad behavior.

This actually kills even the vast majority of religious fiction, because even villains that get a comeuppance are beyond the pale. Most moralistic preachy books (good reads and bad!) have some antagonist who is evil or bad or just plain assholish, and the hero defeats him or converts him or otherwise wins in order to deliver the message that "this guy is bad."

But if it's a normal person who is misbehaving, the Maxwells don't think that this "bad" person, even if punished, is suitable reading because the kids might discover for the first time that this particular bad behavior exists.

So they've nixed books because one of the kids in there sticks out his tongue at siblings, things like that.

Meanwhile when it comes to "truth," they will reject things that have even depictions of non-Christian religion, for instance. The idea is that the content needs to be fully taken at face value, it needs to be something that the kids can take as an example without reservations. (This is scary if you think about it - it's specifically denying any and all opportunities to learn how to be a critical reader.)

In the "truthiness" category, they've nixed books because it had a kid getting a "spanking for good luck" on his birthday. Why? Because spankings don't really bring good luck.

Similarly Steve-O had to turn off a documentary video that showed a guy making a dangerous climb in the Himalayas, because it showed the guy going to worship at his temple first. Steve-O can not do the obvious thing and tell the kids that hey, the important part here is that it shows how nervous the guy is about this climb. THAT is how crazy restrictive they are.

Elsewhere they've been asked about their reading habits and they said they let the kids read Christian biographies, and that's about it. I would imagine those have some villains too, but I suppose it's far enough removed from naughtiness that kids would do, plus it's actual history, so maybe they allow some "bad" characters in those. Dunno.

[anjulibai]

Their requirements for books makes me wonder how the kids are allowed to read the Bible. There's so much bad behavior in that it's not even funny.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

Their requirements for books makes me wonder how the kids are allowed to read the Bible. There's so much bad behavior in that it's not even funny.

It's TRVTH, so they probably have to allow it.

That said though, they are strict KJV people, so the language in there is fussy enough that it's possible a lot goes over the heads of the kids when they're little.

Also a lot of the truly horrific bad behavior in the Bible is about killing and raping and various things that don't seem to have such... direct relevance to young kids' possible behavior choices. The main "bad characters, must ban!" stuff that Steve-O forbids seems to be any sort of disobedient or worse yet "sassy" children.

...which makes sense I guess, considering his own "goals" of perfect non-rebelling children. He wants his kids to not know that answering him with a Bronx cheer is even possible, to not know that there are people who sleep in on the weekends and occasionally steal an extra animal cracker when Mom leaves the kitchen unattended, to not know that kids bicker and even fight and the world doesn't end.

ETA: Speaking of which, any book with sibling rivalry is right out. That alone is going to ban most kids' fiction - if a character resents a younger sibling, it's not permitted. New baby and kid feels jealous? Banned. Etc. It's just so crazy restrictive. Most "normal" kid books are about having an imperfect character that the reader empathizes with so the reader can learn ALONG WITH the character how to handle these situations in life. So... not okay.

[anjulibai]

Sassy kid bad, raping and pillaging in God's name good.

Kid jealous of new baby bad, man stealing birthright from his brother good.

Character's holding hands before marriage good, Song of Solomon and Solomon fucking the Queen of Sheba out of wedlock good.

You are a strange man, Steve.

[VodouDoll]

"Fun" means you're not actively pursuing your "goals" so possibly not.

However, if they can make reading be a form of studying, I think they'd allow it. The main problem is more insidious - the Maxwells aren't allowed to read books that are unsuitable, and for them, "unsuitable" includes having ANY examples of either "untruth" OR bad behavior.

This actually kills even the vast majority of religious fiction, because even villains that get a comeuppance are beyond the pale. Most moralistic preachy books (good reads and bad!) have some antagonist who is evil or bad or just plain assholish, and the hero defeats him or converts him or otherwise wins in order to deliver the message that "this guy is bad."

But if it's a normal person who is misbehaving, the Maxwells don't think that this "bad" person, even if punished, is suitable reading because the kids might discover for the first time that this particular bad behavior exists.

So they've nixed books because one of the kids in there sticks out his tongue at siblings, things like that.

Meanwhile when it comes to "truth," they will reject things that have even depictions of non-Christian religion, for instance. The idea is that the content needs to be fully taken at face value, it needs to be something that the kids can take as an example without reservations. (This is scary if you think about it - it's specifically denying any and all opportunities to learn how to be a critical reader.)

God, he is the literal worst. What are his children's inner lives like? What do they think about? How would they ever get along in the world without him to mediate, if they've never been exposed to a single thing they need to evaluate for themselves and think critically about? They've never encountered complexity or ambiguity. Are they just...blank inside? Dangerously naive? Stupefyingly ignorant? What do they think about? What do they talk about? What is there?

Incidentally, those restrictions go for Teri too. I remember a long ago dad's corner where she started to read a book from the Left Behind series and Steve made her stop because the antichrist is a character in it and other characters (who he has fooled) praise him for being a good guy. Steve wouldn't let Teri read people saying nice things about the antichrist, even though in the context of the story it's obvious that those people don't even know he's the antichrist, just the guy who solved world hunger or whatever. So she had to get rid of the book.

[gardenvarietycitizen]

God, he is the literal worst. What are his children's inner lives like? What do they think about? How would they ever get along in the world without him to mediate, if they've never been exposed to a single thing they need to evaluate for themselves and think critically about?

Excellent question.

The extra weird thing about all this is - Sarah is now over 30 years old. That means that she is OLDER than her parents were when they started all this "sheltering" business. She could theoretically get married tomorrow and have a kid in a year, whom she'd need to start "sheltering." But how on earth would she begin to do it?

[singsingsing]

Not to be nit picky but I don't think there's anything about Solomon fucking the Queen of Sheba in the Bible. But yeah, otherwise I totally agree, I've read the entire Bible and I have literally no idea how they reconcile the OT with their purity obsession. It's basically the original Game of Thrones.

[browncoatslytherin]

Not to be nit picky but I don't think there's anything about Solomon fucking the Queen of Sheba in the Bible. But yeah, otherwise I totally agree, I've read the entire Bible and I have literally no idea how they reconcile the OT with their purity obsession. It's basically the original Game of Thrones.

bear with me, because it's been ages since i've picked up a bible, but wasn't it implied that they had an illicit relationship? and i totally agree re original got. i sometimes wonder if georgie boy borrowed a few ideas from ye old good book? ;)

[ILoveJellybeans]

God, he is the literal worst. What are his children's inner lives like? What do they think about? How would they ever get along in the world without him to mediate, if they've never been exposed to a single thing they need to evaluate for themselves and think critically about? They've never encountered complexity or ambiguity. Are they just...blank inside? Dangerously naive? Stupefyingly ignorant? What do they think about? What do they talk about? What is there?

Incidentally, those restrictions go for Teri too. I remember a long ago dad's corner where she started to read a book from the Left Behind series and Steve made her stop because the antichrist is a character in it and other characters (who he has fooled) praise him for being a good guy. Steve wouldn't let Teri read people saying nice things about the antichrist, even though in the context of the story it's obvious that those people don't even know he's the antichrist, just the guy who solved world hunger or whatever. So she had to get rid of the book.

I think the Moody books are the answer to what Sarah thinks about. The sad thing, is that it is an example of a real person who is trying to be creative and failing miserably.

I think they spend most of their time cleaning kitchen cabinets in silence. All they think and talk about is either God (but always spouting what Steve tells them, not doing any deep thinking on the meaning of life or even trying to work out what certain verses mean), their schedule, and things that happened to them in the past. Like when one of them accidentally left a bit of paper on a slice of cheese and ate it.

I imagine 99% of the time, if you were to read a Maxwell's thoughts, it would be completely blank and empty.

I wonder if they dream...and about what? Do they have the same kind of weird dreams that the average person has, Like they have a dream that they are at home, and then Steve comes in to talk to them and tells them to go and clean their spaceship, but its not Steve, its an octopus with Steve's voice and there is a toilet in their kitchen. Then they go and clean their spaceship which is suddenly in their garden, but the mop turns into a banana and Octopus-Steve challenges them to a duel with giant bananas.

Its sad how someone can have kids and then screw them up so horribly. They don't stand a chance in the real world, or even the average fundie world.

[Buzzard]

Not to be nit picky but I don't think there's anything about Solomon fucking the Queen of Sheba in the Bible. But yeah, otherwise I totally agree, I've read the entire Bible and I have literally no idea how they reconcile the OT with their purity obsession. It's basically the original Game of Thrones.

Do they censor the bible? Song of Solomon... :pink-shock:

[browncoatslytherin]

Do they censor the bible? Song of Solomon... :pink-shock:

oh yeah, lots of nike! level stuff in there :P

does anyone else remember anything about an illicit relationship between solomon and the queen of sheba? i don't recall anything specific, but i thought, while reading the bible and being older, that something was implied to happen between them. *shrug* maybe it was just me.

[anjulibai]

Yes, the relationship is implied. Heck, the Ethiopian monarchy was/is based on the idea that the king is a descendant of Solomon and Sheba.

There's also the many concubines and wives Solomon has, but again, that's okay.

[singsingsing]

I don't think the relationship was really implied - I know later legends implied it (or straight out said it happened, i.e. the Ethiopian monarchy legend), but not in the actual Bible story. I think people (myself included) just read it, think about how many wives and concubines Solomon had, and then think that if there's a woman visiting him and she's impressed with him, she must have slept with him. If someone can produce a verse where it's actually implied I'll gladly eat my words. :)

As for Song of Solomon, it's always brought up as the salacious part of the Bible, but it is BY FAR not the most salacious part. Not even close. Song of Solomon is tame. Trying reading the part where the guy's wife/concubine (unclear) is violently gang raped all night, then left for dead at his doorstep in the morning. Then they cut her body up and send a piece to each of the tribes. Or the part where two sisters get their father drunk and have sex with him. Or the part where David's son rapes his own sister. Or where Jael invites the enemy leader into her tent, lets him go to sleep, and then drives a tent peg through his head.

I could go on.

[anjulibai]

I don't think the relationship was really implied - I know later legends implied it (or straight out said it happened, i.e. the Ethiopian monarchy legend), but not in the actual Bible story. I think people (myself included) just read it, think about how many wives and concubines Solomon had, and then think that if there's a woman visiting him and she's impressed with him, she must have slept with him. If someone can produce a verse where it's actually implied I'll gladly eat my words. :)

As for Song of Solomon, it's always brought up as the salacious part of the Bible, but it is BY FAR not the most salacious part. Not even close. Song of Solomon is tame. Trying reading the part where the guy's wife/concubine (unclear) is violently gang raped all night, then left for dead at his doorstep in the morning. Then they cut her body up and send a piece to each of the tribes. Or the part where two sisters get their father drunk and have sex with him. Or the part where David's son rapes his own sister. Or where Jael invites the enemy leader into her tent, lets him go to sleep, and then drives a tent peg through his head.

I could go on.

And yet all of that is okay to read about, but most children's literature, even Christian children's literature, is not.

It just blows my mind.