Few things serve as a starker reminder of Mormonism’s near omnipresence in Utah than the 14 temples that dot our state’s landscape. The Salt Lake temple, as the church’s flagship temple, casts the longest shadow. And because a lot of ex-Mormons and non-Mormons here don’t like living in that shadow, the Salt Lake temple for them almost takes on a menacing visage (the fact that it resembles a fortress doesn’t help).
But I have a confession to make: For the most part, I actually like the temples. Admittedly, I sometimes get the creeps from the Salt Lake temple. Perhaps it’s just too synonymous with the LDS Church’s inordinate influence in Utah. Otherwise, I’m able to divorce the temples from Mormonism and appreciate them as architectural works and landmarks.
Now I don’t really understand the aesthetics behind good architecture, but I find many of the temples beautiful. The Provo temple is an eye-sore, granted. When I was a student at USU, however, I loved the view I had of the Logan temple. And where I currently live, I enjoy my proximity to the Draper temple as well. Other temples that I like include the Washington D.C., San Diego, and the Laie Hawaii temples.
Having a big, beautiful building around which a city is constructed appeals to my Europhilia, I guess. One of my favorite things about Germany is that every village has either its own distinctive castle or cathedral. That isn’t to say that an LDS temple is the architectural equivalent to, say, Notre Dame. But compared to the big box retailers and chain franchises that dominate suburban Utah, LDS temples are a welcome sight.
I doubt ex-Catholics have the same aversion to European cathedrals as ex-Mormons do toward LDS temples. Many cathedrals in Europe are seen as fairly secular. Indeed, a number of the cathedrals I visited in Germany were not operated and maintained by solely the Catholic Church, but the government too (as they are recognized to be both historic sites and tourist attractions)*. And to the extent that cathedrals invoke the thought of religion, it’s often just as a relic of Europe’s religious past. Today, the pews are empty—save for Easter and Christmas Mass. Even in the 19th-century, Nietzsche referred to churches and cathedrals as “tombs of God”.
Should Mormonism collapse in Utah as Catholicism largely has in Western Europe, would we value the LDS temples enough to preserve them? I hope so.
*I initially claimed that some of these Cathedrals were wholly operated by the German government, but that was mistaken, as I explain in the comments.
Wow, I didn’t realize that. What does the government do with the buildings? Just run them as tourist attractions, historical landmarks? Presumably they aren’t holding Mass…
I’m not sure to what extent this is true throughout Europe, but in Germany at least there were a few Cathedrals that were operated by the local or federal government as primarily civic buildings or tourist attractions. I was probably overstating it when I said that they were seen as “wholly secular”, though. They probably have some relationship with the Catholic Church and have Easter and Christmas mass there. But most Sundays, the pews are empty and the building is open to the public to loiter about the place.
I’ll see if I can find more info for you.
Eh, upon further review, my initial claim was predicated on a misunderstanding of the relationship between the Catholic Church and the German government. The separation of church and state there is different than here. Because the German government recognizes many of its Cathedrals to be historic sites, it does contribute public funds toward their reconstruction and maintenance. And in return, the Catholic Church opens them up to some public/interdenominational functions. Generally speaking, though, they are still religious building with religious functions. The reason they strike me and Germans as secular is just because they are so often empty and the religious activities so rare. So in purpose they still function as a Catholic institution, but in practice they act more like a tourist attraction and historical site.
Part of my confusion, too, my be due to the fact that I’m not used to religious buildings being open to the public. LDS temples, with the exception of their opening, are closed to the public. But Cathedrals generally remain open to the public so that people can enter there to pray and meditate, no?
I hope this will put my comment in the right place… I can’t nest any further, it seems.
Thanks for the clarification. Still very interesting though! You’re right about cathedrals in the US. On a high school art history trip to New York City, we toured a cathedral or two and it seemed like a pretty common occurrence. Larger churches in general seem to often be open to passersby wandering in (large = they’re big enough to be able to staff an office or at least a desk with someone to keep an eye on the building).
I have kind of a similar “what, huh?” reaction to National Cathedral in Washington, DC. As far as I can tell, the name reflects the fact that it’s located in DC, not that it’s actually a federal agency or something. I guess it’s just the fact that prominent federal officials attend Red Mass each year that gets me mixed up.
I like the more unique ones, such as the ones you mentioned, but the cookie-cutter versions built in more recent years in say Adelaide, just bug the crap out of me. Like everyone outside of the US or Europe kinda gets screwed. I think over a third of the temples existing today have this design.
See how repetitive it gets: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IGYWmcIzSk
You get the creeps around the SLC temple because it’s eerie! I never consciously thought about it before, but when I read that, I realized that I have always gotten the same feeling around that building, and I agree it’s probably the fortress-like style, how tall it, and the long shadow which causes the area around to get very cold (has anyone else noticed that?). The Logan temple is among my favorites, just a beautiful, older style and the neighborhoods around it are gorgeous as well.
That being said, I’m sort of caught in a bind about how I feel about lds temples. On the one hand, they are (for the most part) beautiful buildings and I enjoy having them around, but this nagging little memory of hearing my ward members repeat this idea that non-lds people just love mormon temples and that gets them interested in who the mormons are and all of the sudden I feel like I’m falling into this pre-established thought process and I get irritated. But then again, I also want to stay true to myself and realize that just because I’m not mormon doesn’t mean I can’t recognize beautiful aspects of a religion, and I don’t want to be one of *those* exmormons who can’t like anything mormon simply because it is associated with mormonism. *sigh*
I find very few LDS temples to be beautiful buildings. Some are hopelessly trapped in the architectural style of the time of their construction (the Ogden Temple comes to mind). Most others look like giant mausoleums (London, Draper, Mesa AZ, etc). Frankly, the Logan temple style is one of the few that I like. It is quite beautiful.
I have never been inside an lds temple, but the pictures I have seen suggest the interior isn’t much better than the exterior. Blindingly white corporate meeting room is the motif?
On a related note: I am looking out my office window at the new Ag building on USU’s campus. I hate it, particularly the glass facade. Is this a university or an office park?
In my defense, I said I find them beautiful relative to big box retail stores like Walmart, not Notre Dame or anything ha ha. That’s a pretty low bar, admittedly. But the temples I see most often I like–Logan, Salt Lake, Oquirrh, and (to a lesser extent) Draper. I agree that others like Ogden and Provo are eye sores (even relative to some retail stores haha).
What do you think of the new lds temple that is being built in Rome?
http://www.ldschurchtemples.com/rome/
Forgetting the religious aspect, I doubt it will take much place on architectural site-seeing trips, given the competition.
http://tidingsspot.info/2010/01/worlds-biggest-church-st-peters-basillica-2/
I am surprised there are enough Mormons in Italy to justify a temple. I read on the lds page that it will service 23,000 members. That is not very many, if the ratio of temple :: member was 1: 23,000 then there would be 4 or 5 temples here in Cache Valley.
It looks like something out of Star Wars, from that pic at least. It’s unique, but no competition for the Vatican.
“Admittedly, I sometimes get the creeps from the Salt Lake temple. Perhaps it’s just too synonymous with the LDS Church’s inordinate influence in Utah.”
The SLC skyline actually has the opposite effect on me. Here we have an LDS temple surrounded by taller corporate office buildings (although admittedly one of these buildings is the church’s hq). Logan’s temple doesn’t really have anything to compete with and the DC temple I see every time I visit Maryland is the *only* building I can see on that portion of the freeway.
Makes sense. Interesting perspective.
If all you folks hate Utah as much as you profess to do (using adjectives like “creepy,” “eerie”, “mausoleums”, etc., to describe the temples), why don’t you just pack your asses up and haul your rotting carcasses and decaying mentalities off to friendlier climes…? I hate the weather in Utah–which was reason enough for me never to take up permanent residence there. I went home long ago… If you think you are accomplishing something by decrying the horrible Mormon gloom which blocks out the sun–take another look… Those are clouds, stupid…! And you are living at the extreme west boundary of the Mountain Time Zone–which means that the sun rises later in the day every morning in winter, spring, summer–the whole damned year…
If you plan to stay, I suspect that it has some something to do with your pocketbook–or your aspiration for higher learning. Nobody is holding a gun to your head. There isn’t any shambling black form in the night taunting, “…Luckless mortal fool, your are condemned to eternal Mormon damnation and torment–be resigned to your fate, and enjoy it or else…!”
Get a grip, folks…!
Just because I find one building in Utah occasionally creepy doesn’t mean I don’t like the state at large. For the record, I actually like Utah. I may enjoy other states more, I don’t know, but Utah is home.
Glad you like it, Jon… But remember: You wouldn’t even be there, had not Brigham Young and all the Mormons been driven out of Ohio, Missouri, and Illinois, after mobbings and genocide, and left U.S. territory to settle where you now call home. Of course you’ll have some rational, logical argument to refute that, so I won’t even bother to discuss it with you any further. I bow to your superior education and superior intellect…
I just think it’s a little odd for someone to say “…I may enjoy other states more, I don’t know, but Utah is home…” Strange justification for staying in what must be a haunted place for you, the way you keep trying to bite the hand that has fed you all your life. If I held anything in such contempt as you profess to feel about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I sure as hell would not be living in their back yard…!
Were it not for Osama Bin Laden killing thousands of innocent people I wouldn’t have been in Iraq and wouldn’t have met the woman I fell in love with those years ago. Were it not for mormons being killed by gangs and attacked by state governments they wouldn’t be here in this beautiful state. If we hadn’t turned millions of living, thinking, complete human persons into farm equipment for 250 years we wouldn’t as many nice things today. We shouldn’t avoid our history but we don’t have to positively account for all of it.
I agree that people who complain endlessly about this “theocracy” or whatever should leave. Go somewhere else and be happy instead of just perpetuating your misery. But I sense these people are losers, like the band Tool that hates LA while enjoying its luxuries. I will probably leave here one day, I just feel more at home in some other places, but there are many things here I like, the classical music scene, mountain ranges, general health and lack of crime compared to more “diverse” (in the liberal sense, not the dynamic sense) areas where I’ve lived like Houston Texas. Part of the reason I leave though is that the churches, from many of the religions here including mormons, are just so ugly, and its part of the general aesthetic of the area. USU is a nice school but its buildings suck, the churches across the state look like real estate offices, houses have less personality or appeal than an episode of Friends. Its as if people aren’t proud, aren’t in a life and faith they love, but rather one that conveniences them, like in LA and Austin. The pioneer ruggedness has been replaced by a me-first sneer. In England that sneer erupted in kids trying to kill the royal family because of increased tuition.
I wish the temples looked more like a fortress of old. I prefer the cathedrals of Europe because they appeal to something rather than looking like nothing. The Logan temple is an exception, I really like how it combines a sort of rustic Rhode Island feel with grand design. The whole “creepy look” stuff is more a matter of perception. A bit of different lighting and angle and the gorgeous cathedral of Koln can look like some “evil” place with great misdeeds. I love the malevolent look the black has given the cathedral though, its a look of power and glory and unity of a people rather than bland and dispirited.
More rambling perhaps later, i have a funeral to attend. Good post Jon.
I love your blog, Jon, and this post was particularly interesting to me. I think that the majority of the temples that I have visited are actually quite visually stunning, though I often rely on the landscaping more than the architecture to validate this sentiment. Perhaps I just like parks.
While I am still, often, swept up in the excitement surrounding each new temple that is announced, I have found myself repeating– almost word-for-word– Kellie’s mixed feelings at the end of her post on May 11th. I really appreciate your positive spin on a location that gives so many ex/non-Mormons the creeps. Thanks!
Side-note: You might be excited to know that they are in the process of tearing down the Ogden temple. They are going to completely re-build a new, more modern one in its place. Hopefully this one will be less of a blight on the landscape? While I prefer the more traditional style of the Nauvoo, St. George, Logan and Manti temples, I think that the before and [proposed] after pictures are actually kind of exciting to scroll through, specifically pictures 42, 43, 44 and 45: http://www.ldschurchtemples.com/ogden/construction/
Thanks for the kind words, David. I’m glad you like the blog. I regret that I haven’t been my usual prolific self as of late, but I hope to write more often soon. In the interim, you’d be welcome to contribute guest posts if you’re interested! I’ve always been interested in your perspective on Mormonism.