Gilmour's analysis of the Revelation book using reader-response theory is a fascinating read; the link is in the article that Mr. Monroe linked to (if that makes sense). He very aptly describes the Society's rhetorical strategy:
The vast quantity of literature produced by the society in order to keep the current body of symbols alive for the membership consists necessarily of a constant repetition of the basic viable symbolic themes. This repetition becomes mantric in quality, and the society’s constant rephrasing and re-presentation of the basic corpus of recognized belief becomes for the membership the rhythmic life-breath of the symbol, the truth...
He's quoting Botting's book in that last phrase. No wonder the meetings and literature seem to repetitive! It's because--duh--they are and that's so easily recognized by an outsider. Even when I was in, I had that sense, but I discounted it, considering the "mantric" repetition to be instead "timely reminders." Blech.
Reading Gilmour's analysis of the Revelation book really highlights how insular and paranoid the Society's teachings are, and underscores, for me, how you really can't critique a discourse as long as you're embedded in it. Once you're out, though, wow--the arrogance and paranoia just leap out at you.
His comments regarding the visual imagery in the book are interesting too--he notes prominence given to depictions of white Western heterosexual males, how sexual imagery is reviled as "disgusting" while the book is peppered with very violent images, and how depictions of spirit creatures are consistently old, white Westernized males. It's worth a read.
