Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Trib Article Re: Movement to "Save" the Provo Temple


Recommended Posts

Posted

Here

Quote

Latter-day Saints launch a last-ditch push to save that Space Age Provo Temple
The church has preserved so many other temples, they ask, why not this one?

By Peggy Fletcher Stack | Dec. 18, 2023, 6:00 a.m.

The instant I saw the article I figured it was by Peggy Fletcher Stack.  She has spent the last many years elevating relative mundane, even banal, intra-Church "controversies" into "news" items.

Quote

They say they have written hundreds of letters, circulated petitions with thousands of signatures, reached out to regional leaders and made countless calls.

But in the two years since a core group of Latter-day Saints organized to preserve the original design of the Provo Temple, they’ve not heard a peep from headquarters or any officials with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

No response. Nada. Nothing. Not an email, a call, a note of recognition. Total silence.

“It’s like screaming into the void,” says Jennifer Bruton, a spokesperson for the grassroots group Preserve the Provo Temple. “That’s one of the disappointments.”

I would like to see the Church more responsive to such inquiries.  That said, I would also like to see people like Jennifer Bruton not create adversarial social-media-based pressure groups regarding matters that are clearly within the ecclesiastical stewardship and purview of the Church, and not go running to the Salt Lake Tribune to foment pressure on the Church.

Quote

Now, with the temple’s Feb. 24 closure looming and demolition creeping ever closer — Bruton has seen construction materials on the temple property — a sense of urgency has set in.

One of the biggest “betrayals,” she says, was that the first announcement failed to portray the sweeping extent of the makeover to an edifice where thousands of missionaries first experienced the church’s most sacred rituals.

This seems pretty overwrought.  Even melodramatic.  Not uncommon for "news" stories from Peggy Fletcher Stack.

Quote

Now, the new design bears no resemblance to the original and its footprint on the lot isn’t even the same.

Some years ago the Church did a "sweeping" makeover of the Ogden Temple, so it wasn't exactly a surprise that it ended up doing the same with its twin, the Provo Temple.

Quote

The petitioners are fine with repairs, renovations, seismic upgrades and other improvements; they just want to save that exterior.

An understandable sentiment, but it's not their call.  

Quote

“We are happy to see the temple brought up to date functionally, but we petition church leaders to preserve the building that is so meaningful to us,” one of the petitions says. “Temple renovations have occurred recently with other temples, and we ask that the Provo Temple be renovated in a way that will preserve the look, feel, and character of the temple that we love so much.”

I wonder if the Church  conducts, for lack of a better term, "market research" regarding renovations/remodels of temples, as this might mitigate or preempt efforts like the one described above, and would reduce the instances of the institutional Church appearing to be, or actually being, "high-handed" in sensitive matters such as this. 

It's quite understandable that some members become attached to the architectural features of a temple.  I think there was near unanimity in support of the Church's decision to convert the Provo Tabernacle into a temple, and to do so in a way that preserved its brickwork facade.  I think that, more often than not, the Church looks to preserve its historical buildings.  However, such decision-making processes are a subjective, case-by-case sort of effort.

Quote

The Ogden and Provo temples evoked “a Space Age symbolism, a streamlined Saturn V rocket propelling the Apollo module beyond the terrestrial frontiers and into the great void of space,” Steven Cornell and Kirk Huffaker wrote in The Salt Lake Tribune in 2010. “...The intended symbol, a Hebraic pillar of fire atop the cloud God employed to stifle the Egyptian army as Israel made her miraculous escape, was similar to the modern Saturn V imagery.”

For better or worse — and plenty of Latter-day Saints loathed that look — they became part of temple legacy and lore.

The intended symbolism has already been diminished by painting the temple's spire white, where it was originally an orange "pillar of fire"-style color:

Then:

old+provo+temple.jpg

Now:

provo-utah-temple-2.jpeg

As for "plenty of Latter-day Saints loathed that look," I wonder how true that is.  

Quote

“We must recognize and honor our past, the good and bad of it,” petition signer Rachel Whipple, now a member of the Provo City Council, writes, “not erase it and replace it with a homogenous present.”

Hmm.  So the current design of the Provo Temple is "the ... bad" part of "our past"?  Is that what she's saying?

This isn't a winning argument to preserve the current iteration.

Quote

Provo native and architectural historian Alan Barnett believes the current design serves a function of its own.

“The Provo Temple is historically significant, representing a significant development in temple design that affected subsequent temples,” Barnett writes on his petition. “With the original Ogden Temple gone, the Provo Temple stands alone to represent an important period in church history.”

Some find the half-century-old temple “odd and different from any other temple,” the historian states, “but we value it for its architectural uniqueness and appreciate its symbolism and history.”

Back in 2021 I posted a thread: Is the Provo Temple . . . Ugly?

It looks like the discussion has not advanced much in the last two years.  The gist is that the aesthetic appeal of the Provo Temple is quite uneven, with even those wanting to preserve it acknowledging the appeal as "bad."

Quote

Bruton wonders why other temples — St. George; Manti; Oakland, Calif; Mesa, Ariz., and Washington, D.C. — have been preserved, while Provo needs to be reconfigured into a carbon copy of many current ones.

I suspect these other temples have a more pleasing aesthetic appeal.  From my 2021 post:

Quote

Social media was awash in comments about the proposed revisions.

“I am sad to see it go! The old Provo temple is like your family dog. We are allowed to complain about it but that doesn’t mean we want to replace it!” tweeted Lauren Simpson. “It’s an ugly dog, but it’s OUR ugly dog.”

“It was distinctive, cleanly artistic w/carefully chosen symbolism,” Weston C. tweeted, “and took a cherished (if sometimes poked fun at) place in personal/local history.”

I suspect the Church has had a half century of the Provo Temple being affectionately denigrated, and feel that this is not compatible with the building's purpose being the "House of the Lord" (and not so much, as the above guy suggests, "to represent an important period in church history").

Quote

After church leaders announced in March 2021 that wall paintings — including a “World Room” scene painted by the famed Minerva Teichert — would be removed from the pioneer-era Manti Temple as part of its renovation, many members and preservationists were outraged. A couple of months later, church authorities did an about-face, explaining that the treasured murals would remain and a new temple would be erected in nearby Ephraim.

More recently, apostle Jeffrey R. Holland celebrated the renovation and rededication of the St. George Temple. He told of the care and love given to that “marvelous edifice” and how it “holds a special place” in his heart.

Bruton feels the same way about the Provo Temple. Working for its preservation has been an emotional undertaking for her.

“I have personally held the hands of elderly members of the church, who sobbed, telling me they couldn’t believe the temple they watched go up in their neighborhood, the one they contributed their income to build,” the activist writes in an unpublished letter, “was going to be torn down.”

Bruton recalls a tearful woman looking at her saying: “They have saved so many temples, why not this one?”

Perhaps because "this one" is lacking in aesthetic appeal and grandeur?  Such that even its devotees describe it as"the ... bad" part of "our past," as "an ugly dog, but it’s OUR ugly dog"?

Quote

The sacred moments, the cherished feelings and the communions with God within its sacred walls “are apparently less important than those that take place in other temples,” Bruton writes, “That ‘sacred building’ will soon by thrown into a dumpster, destined for a landfill. The spire, the beacon across Utah Valley, will be torn to the ground by heavy machinery and tossed aside.”

As Bruton looks out her Provo window, she can see the temple’s spire “reaching up the peaks of the Wasatch Mountains.”

Why are only “certain temples” and “certain people,” she asks, “worth the care and devotion of the church?”

Yeesh.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

Posted
37 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Thoughts?

I don't mind the current look of the Provo temple.  It wasn't that much different than Ogden, but somehow it looks better to me than Ogden did.

I'm not a fan of the current temple design such as Brigham City.  Chunky and blocky are two words that come to mind when I look at them.  The height of the spires also seem too much for the size of the building.  And they're too chunky and blocky.

brigham-city-temple-neal-jorgensen-3470243130.jpg.f83a29b3f296cbb5303a5db852d949bb.jpg

 

That being said I find Tribune led church activism distasteful. 

Posted

I’m guessing that they have hardly anyone wanting to get married at the Provo Temple, and with as many marriages as would be happening in that area, they probably want a temple that can pull its weight there.

I agree that it’s disappointing that the church has not responded to the pleas of the members because I think they deserve an answer. And it’s long annoyed me how the church keeps everything so secret, even stuff that could easily be shared. But this idea that because a group wants the temple to look a certain way that it’s wrong for them not to get what they want annoys me too.

Disappointment isn’t a hardship. I hate when groups try to make it one.

Posted
6 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I’m guessing that they have hardly anyone wanting to get married at the Provo Temple, and with as many marriages as would be happening in that area, they probably want a temple that can pull its weight there.

I agree that it’s disappointing that the church has not responded to the pleas of the members because I think they deserve an answer. And it’s long annoyed me how the church keeps everything so secret, even stuff that could easily be shared. But this idea that because a group wants the temple to look a certain way that it’s wrong for them not to get what they want annoys me too.

Disappointment isn’t a hardship. I hate when groups try to make it one.

I suspect it isn't about simply 'sharing' with the members the rationale but wanting to avoid a massive, belabored confrontation even after the leadership has explained why. Increasingly, these kinds of exchanges seem more than just about sharing information and instead providing fodder for those who are in opposition to make it an even more protracted and hostile exchange.  

Posted
21 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

I suspect it isn't about simply 'sharing' with the members the rationale but wanting to avoid a massive, belabored confrontation even after the leadership has explained why. Increasingly, these kinds of exchanges seem more than just about sharing information and instead providing fodder for those who are in opposition to make it an even more protracted and hostile exchange.  

We ought not be hashing these things out in the public sphere, particularly in an adversarial/activism way.

Thanks,

-Smac

Posted
2 hours ago, bluebell said:

I’m guessing that they have hardly anyone wanting to get married at the Provo Temple, and with as many marriages as would be happening in that area, they probably want a temple that can pull its weight there.

How much would this have to do with the look of the temple and how much that many of the people who are getting married are students who were raised elsewhere  or whose families live elsewhere?

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

I agree that it’s disappointing that the church has not responded to the pleas of the members because I think they deserve an answer. And it’s long annoyed me how the church keeps everything so secret, even stuff that could easily be shared. But this idea that because a group wants the temple to look a certain way that it’s wrong for them not to get what they want annoys me too.

Disappointment isn’t a hardship. I hate when groups try to make it one.

 

Posted
3 hours ago, Vanguard said:

I suspect it isn't about simply 'sharing' with the members the rationale but wanting to avoid a massive, belabored confrontation even after the leadership has explained why. Increasingly, these kinds of exchanges seem more than just about sharing information and instead providing fodder for those who are in opposition to make it an even more protracted and hostile exchange.  

I can't imagine the response to answering a question would be more likely to blow up into a massive confrontation than ignoring the question completely though.    I mean, it's just "why are you redesigning the temple"?  Sure, some people might not like the answer but silence has already gotten the opposition a platform in the papers (and probably news) so it doesn't seem like the risks of "providing fodder to the opposition" by not staying silent is very great.

Posted
52 minutes ago, Rain said:

How much would this have to do with the look of the temple and how much that many of the people who are getting married are students who were raised elsewhere  or whose families live elsewhere?

 

Since there are two temples in Provo (and like 4 within 30 minutes of it I think), it would be an easy question to answer.  For those who have that data.  Which isn't me and I'm only guessing.  But if City Center is busy busy busy with sealings and Provo is hardly getting any (and they are within 20 minutes of each other), then that would be evidence that there is something about the Provo temple that is keeping the engaged away.

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, smac97 said:

An understandable sentiment, but it's not their call. 

I know some people want to keep the uniqueness, see it as historical or even attractive.  I jumped for joy (at least in my head) when I found it was going to go the more generic style.  I really don’t like the look of it.

Now if they ever touch the Oakland or Cardston temple, that’s it!  I am gone!

Not really.  I wouldn’t even feel betrayed, just heartbroken for a bit.

Quote

As for "plenty of Latter-day Saints loathed that look," I wonder how true that is.  

When I lived near the temple (my grandmother lived about a mile away, great view from her front window and I was also in dorms and then married student housing), I heard more who disliked it than who loved it, but mild to moderate dislikes may get verbalized more than mild to moderate likes.

Edited by Calm
Posted
2 hours ago, ksfisher said:

Our ward building was remodeled about 15 years ago.  It was built in 1920 so there are a number of things about it that make it unique.  One of the things the architect wanted to do was move the podium in the chapel so it was centered.  The bishop was able to work with the church and convinced them to leave it off center without going to the Tribune.  Granted this is a much smaller thing than a temple.  But it does show that the church does listen to local concerns.

It would be interesting to know how the bishop managed to get his concerns in front of the First Presidency, and whether or not that is easily repeatable by people who aren't in leadership positions directly connected to the issue.

Posted
2 hours ago, bluebell said:

Since there are two temples in Provo (and like 4 within 30 minutes of it I think), it would be an easy question to answer.  For those who have that data.  Which isn't me and I'm only guessing.  But if City Center is busy busy busy with sealings and Provo is hardly getting any (and they are within 20 minutes of each other), then that would be evidence that there is something about the Provo temple that is keeping the engaged away.

I didn't think it could happen but I'm a church building snob. My ward building is over 40 years old. It's a two story with the nursery being downstairs. It's dark inside and the carpet is very old. I've had much better in the past, in my married life anyway. But can see how it can happen, I don't like being there much. 

Posted
4 hours ago, Calm said:

if they ever touch the Oakland or Cardston temple,

FYI , with a new temple being built in Lethbridge, when done , there will be a massive reno to Cardston. Hopefully only the interior will change and not the outside,  which is unique. I also hope they do not lose all of the lighting and furniture touches which were influenced by Frank Lloyd Wright. 

Posted

Never been a big fan of the UFO design but at least they had character.  The replacements are so cookie cutter as to lose all impact.  I felt that way about the new Saratoga Springs temple.  A couple of months later and literally the only thing I remember of the building was the beautiful blue color used.

We lost something when we removed all architectural symbolism from temples.  It was a joy to tour the renovated St. George Temple and see the depth of thought and inspiration put into its design.  So grateful it wasn't destroyed in the renovation process.

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, smac97 said:

I wonder if the Church  conducts, for lack of a better term, "market research" regarding renovations/remodels of temples

The Melbourne Australia temple is being closed for much of next year for major internal remodelling (the exterior is the standard mini-temple design and won't be changed as far as I know). The relevant stake presidents got about 7 months notice that it was happening. As far as I'm aware there was no wide-scale "market research", but all the changes appear to be about improving ease of use in a temple that is getting older, so it doesn't surprise me that it's "just happening".

Edited by JustAnAustralian
Posted

I kinda like the appearance of the Provo temple. I attended a couple of Endowment sessions there as a missionary back in 1972.

But I'm perfectly happy to have them change it. I'll most likely never see it again in person, so for me a photograph is as good as a live view. So in that sense, it doesn't matter.

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, blackstrap said:

FYI , with a new temple being built in Lethbridge, when done , there will be a massive reno to Cardston. Hopefully only the interior will change and not the outside,  which is unique. I also hope they do not lose all of the lighting and furniture touches which were influenced by Frank Lloyd Wright. 

No, no, no, not the interior…at least not the style.  I don’t care about the interior structure as much, not a purist there, practicality wins out in most cases for me, though there is great beauty in walking up the staircase between the segments.  It is my favorite temple because of the FLW style.  I much prefer it to the more common gold and creams.  Iirc there are wood pews instead of the more usual comfy seats in at least one of the rooms, but that may be the overall sense of wood that I am remembering as it’s been over 20 years since I last went.  It is possible I am remembering the pictures of an older version rather than the reality as there was the major renovation while we were there in the 90s.    Aesthetically the pews are better than chairs if my memory is correct, but comfort wins there for me, they need to have better supporting chairs for the older and less mobile patrons.  But the ways the walls are painted and the color of the trim, I so hope they stay true to that.

I am relatively confident they will as they did last time around from what I was told as we moved there in the middle of the closure…that was disappointing to have to wait a year after we moved there as I was quite excited to attend it.  You must let me know what happens…also if I am right or not about the wood pews.

I am feeling old again….it has been almost 35 years since the Cardston renovation.  We moved there when my youngest was a month old.  Doesn’t seem that long ago when I think of time, but so much has happened, and yet so much is still the same.

Edited by Calm
Posted
14 hours ago, bluebell said:

I can't imagine the response to answering a question would be more likely to blow up into a massive confrontation than ignoring the question completely though.    I mean, it's just "why are you redesigning the temple"?  Sure, some people might not like the answer but silence has already gotten the opposition a platform in the papers (and probably news) so it doesn't seem like the risks of "providing fodder to the opposition" by not staying silent is very great.

Point taken. I believe either way that 'silence' on the matter or providing the rationale behind the action will not quell the masses in opposition though it's probably better to at least nominally explain why.  

Posted

If you have ever dealt with a four year old's question why? you will be aware that any answer is always followed by another WHY? question and then another. 😜

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Many have chosen to travel to Portland over marrying in Seattle for the same reason. 

Portland is beautiful.  Seattle comes from the same architectural era as the London Temple, which I have a soft spot for since my parents were married there.

Edited by JLHPROF
Posted (edited)

Question - are we done with Moroni statues?

Looking at renderings of temples under construction and he's very absent.  Lot's of spires and domes.

Edited by JLHPROF
Posted
3 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Many have chosen to travel to Portland over marrying in Seattle for the same reason. 

I wonder if this is one of the bigger driving forces behind the makeover for the Provo Temple.  The Provo Temple's design/aesthetic is dated to the "Space Age" era of the late 60s and early 70s.  There are many aspects of this era that have not held up well.  Much of the commentary about the Provo Temple (and its twin, the Ogden Temple) makes note of this:

Here (February 2010) :

Quote

Downtown Ogden's LDS temple, a rounded building of white cast stone, is getting an extreme makeover. And, when it's finished, the 38-year-old sacred edifice will look a lot like its contemporary counterpart in Draper.

The temple's entire exterior will be reshaped with new stone and art glass and its entrance moved to face Washington Boulevard, rather than the parking lot. The old two-tiered parking garage will be removed and new underground parking added.

The temple's footprint, or core, will remain the same and the space inside will be reconfigured only slightly. Landscaping will be updated, and a water feature and drive-through drop-off will be installed at the front.

LDS officials declined to disclose the project's price tag. But general authority William R. Walker, at a Wednesday news conference, called it a "huge investment."

"It basically is the same as building a new temple," said Walker, a member of the church's First Quorum of the Seventy.

The three members of the church's governing First Presidency decided to update the temple, he added, because "they thought it somewhat dated."
...

Designed by church architect Emil Fetzer, who died in November, the Ogden Temple's look was controversial from the beginning, said Paul Anderson, a Mormon architect who has written much about the faith's historic buildings.

"It was the church's first try at a new kind of temple," Anderson said. "But people found it uncomfortably unfamiliar."

Some of the building materials were associated with commercial, not sacred architecture, he said. And the location on a main city street, rather than elevated above it, added to that impression.

The temple's upper part seemed to float above the lower story on a row of mirrored windows, rather than all the pieces being firmly rooted to one another, Anderson said. That made the temple appear "less grand, permanent or monumental."

Here (April 2018) :

Quote

The design of the Provo, Utah temple was meant to represent the cloud and pillar of fire that guided the Israelites through the wilderness under the shadow of Mount Sinai. However, today the design is often looked upon as dated and has been affectionately given all sorts of nicknames like “the cupcake” and “the spaceship.”

Here (November 2021) :

Quote

The Provo temple sits adjacent to the Missionary Training Center up a gentle grade, with the dramatic view of Rock Canyon behind it. The building, for all its extremely dated appearance, remains an icon of the region, plainly visible from Interstate 15 as one approaches Provo,  and is now the lone representative of its era after the “demise” of Ogden. Many temple architecture enthusiasts hoped that despite its dated design, the temple would remain as a piece of Latter-day Saint history...
...
Regardless of the rationale, which we have to accept we may never know, the end of the Provo Utah Temple as we know it marks a point where the Church formally turns away from two of its iconic—if dated—temple designs in favor of something more generic and palatable. It will also leave the Washington DC and Sao Paulo Brazil temples as the only true relics of the 1970s.

 

Also, several articles about the makeover of the Ogden Temple spoke of practical reasons for a total refit.  See, e.g., here:

Quote

After Wednesday's announced face-lift to the Ogden Utah Temple, the expected questions regarding the Provo, Salt Lake and Jordan River temples were answered with a resounding "no current plans" by leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Given their mirrored timelines of some four decades and near-identical designs, the Ogden and Provo temples have long been labeled "sister" temples.

Because of the Ogden-Provo parallelism, many reasons cited for upgrading the former temple would seemingly apply also to the latter — seismic concerns, dated exterior and interior designs, inefficient mechanical systems and out-of-date building materials built on old specs and technology.

And here:

Quote

Built nearly 40 years ago, the Ogden Temple is in need of upgrading — to feature the latest technology and material, to meet seismic requirements, to have more energy-efficient and modern mechanical systems and to reflect the redevelopment occurring in downtown Ogden.

"This will be a major renovation of an existing temple that had become somewhat dated," said Elder William R. Walker of the Quorums of the Seventy and executive director of the LDS Church's Temple Department.

"It will be redone in a way that will be like a brand-new temple. This temple will be magnificent and beautiful in every way when it's redone."

I think the Provo Temple has previously had most of its "mechanical systems" updated (for example, the escalators were removed some years ago), but "seismic concerns" and "out-of-date building materials" may be factors as significant as the "dated" architectural design.

Thanks,

-Smac

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...