Today in the
SL Tribune there was an
announcement that the Church is going to remodel the Ogden Temple because, frankly speaking, it isn't very attractive. Well Provo's temple is its twin. So will Provo get a remodel too, or was it just a problem of the Ogden Temple being outclassed by the the Tabernacle next door? I pointed
that out after visiting the Ogden Temple last July. If they remodel Ogden and leave Provo as is, there will be some unhappy campers.
Current version
Tabernacle that looks like a temple
The redesign of the temple block
New and improved version
View with emasculated tabernacle sans tower and spire
What think ye? What's good for Ogden is good for Provo?
That's all for now.
OXO
D.
Current version
Tabernacle that looks like a temple
The redesign of the temple block
New and improved version
View with emasculated tabernacle sans tower and spire
11 comments:
I dont know...although the design is bad, I think I would be sad if they changed it. It is so recognizable as the Provo Temple. I also would not want them to do something that over shadows Rock Canyon.
NONONONO! I like the Provo temple. It is kind of Jetsonesque, but it is what it is, and I like it. And the Ogden design is generic and boring. Save Rock Canyon temple!
Hmmm. Interesting perspectives from my Provo girls. I believe (from reading the Trib article) that there are no plans for Provo as yet.
D.
I agree. I like the Provo temple as is.
Then I guess it is almost unanimous amongst the Provo-born-and-reared girls. Let's see what Katy Kathryn thinks.
D.
P.S. Thanks for the comment, Em; its like cool water in the desert.
I think the Provo temple has a certain charm, though I don't know why they felt the need to paint the steeple thing white. That was dumb.
I am scratching my head as to why the steeple will be removed from the Ogden Tabernacle. Did they think people would confuse the two?
John also does not want the Provo temple changed in any way and would actually like them to change the steeple back to gold. I agree, leave it alone, the new Ogden one looks generic and somewhat boring.
Provo's steeple was painted white as part of a redo that included the addition of Moroni and reworked entry and grounds. The goal was to make it more photogenic so young girls would want to be married there and have their pictures taken. Perhaps it worked; marriages are up there.
We always thought it was a great place for weddings. Each bride was special and not just a number in a herd (like SLC). And the pictures were actually better at Provo than at the Timpanogos Temple, even before the redo.
D.
I wish I could have left my comment first so that it wouldn't seem like I'm a follower but rather a leader. My first reaction when reading your post was this... "Let them do whatever the hell they want to the Ogden temple but don't do anything to the Provo temple." I think one, it is a product of the time in which it was constructed, tacky or not it reflects the era. Two, I also like how unique it is. I like that they painted the steeple and redid the grounds, I think it was the kind of refurbishing that it needed. If they want to do some updating on the interior I would be all for it. However, I love the Provo Temple as is and am glad that most girls don't want to get married there. I love the backdrop of Rock Canyon and I actually like the design of the temple as is. Leave it be...
All right then. It is unanimous. SAVE ROCK CANYON AND THE ROCK CANYON TEMPLE!!
D.
Much too late, with nothing to add, I agree with your girls. Provo is what it is. What's happening to Ogden is a manifestation of the throw-out-the-old-for-the-new need to "update" that plagues our consumer culture (though I do like the design).
Our pictures from Timpanogos don't compare to those of your daughters' from Provo. And I'm all about the golden spire. The symbolism of God's presence was wiped out (cloud of smoke, pillar of fire) with that "update."
Post a Comment