by minimus 58 Replies latest jw friends
They were like cheesy soaps mixed with disney like morality.
The only thing I liked about it was that you did not need to look up texts and could take a mind trip into "other" thoughts which gave me a woody .
Greven.
Edited by - greven on 30 January 2003 7:49:28
Yeah! Men in tights gettin' into fights!
Sorry to dig these out again, but I thought they were somewhat appropriate!
If, I didn't volunteer during the assemblies, I would catch up on my sleep. My wife and went to see Cats in Boston many years ago, and I slept at least half-way through the show and we were sitting about three rows from the stage. My wife was embarrassed. I was sleeping off a hangover.
Guest 77
I did when they first started being done. One, there were as many as 4 dramas in one assembly and it broke up the montony. Two, they seemed to have better dialogue.
Now there is only one per assembly, there has to be a talk afterwards to explain it to you as well, and they take liberties with the Bible, adding people and dialogue that is not in it. Quite a few JWs are too dense to realize that because they never read the scriptural account in preparation.
Basically, they stink now and I anticipate large screens at the assemblies with videos being shown with the explanation that it simplifies things without have large numbers of JWs rehearsing for the drama when they could be out in field service.
Blondie (who misses the orchestras at the assembly, another simplication victim)
I used to like them when they were more Bible-based, like someone said before. The older ones. I do remember the Sodom and Gommorrah one, and how everyone was all "wow!" about Lot's wife turning into a pillar of salt. I can't remember how they did it at our assembly, but you'd think that they should be nominated for an Academy Award the way they were going on about it.
I think I liked them because they were a change of pace...something to break up the monotony. I remember when they used to have more than one in a DC, usually one modern day one, and one "ancient" one.
Back when the the Society was trying to demonize medical organ transplants, c. 1973, they tried to establish that the heart was the source of emotion. Not in the poetic sense, but as a physical fact. (No, really, they did!)
And so the assembled masses were treated to a drama that featured on stage: a giant fibreglass brain, which flashed yellow to a canned voice-over to represent rational thought, and a giant fibreglass heart, which flashed red to a canned voice-over, representing human emotion. The conflict between these two opposing forces dealt with life-altering decision processes such as clothing purchases.
Human Actress: "It's such a pretty dress. But look how much it costs."
(Actress freezes. Conflict ensues.)
Giant Throbbing Heart: I would like to wear this dress.
Giant Throbbing Brain: You can't afford it.
Giant Throbbing Heart: But I really, really want it.
Giant Throbbing Brain: That's materialism. And you can't afford it.
Giant Throbbing Heart: But I really, really, really want it.
Giant Throbbing Brain: Showy display. And you can't afford it.
Giant Throbbing Heart: But I really, really, really, really want it.
It was one of those moments where you are embarrassed for yourself because you are watching others embarrass themselves.
Eric
I admit I do like them. Compared to an hour symposium on keeping your car and house clean, at least the people move a little bit.
*****Rub a Dub
ERIC....I remember that heart/brain drama. That was a sure waste of time. They didn't even understand that the heart wasn't literal. I even knew that!
Ed,
Did the Lot drama include the part with his two daughters?
Ken P.
That heart and brain things was during the time transplants were forbidden. It was thought that a person getting a heart transplant would take on the personality of the donor.
Blondie
