Dave here, pinch-hitting for Hawkgrrrl on this Thanksgiving Eve. Let me introduce you to the Cambridge Dictionary Word of the Year: Parasocial. It’s an adjective and here is the definition they give:
Parasocial: involving or relating to a connection that someone feels between themselves and a famous person they do not know, a character in a book, film, TV series, etc., or an artificial intelligence
Let’s focus on real people that you (or any other person) don’t know. Celebrities leap to mind. I’m sure there are some celebrities you like, but you don’t really know them — they might be a complete jerk and someone you would strongly dislike if you actually met them and spent time with them. Same for musicians and athletes and politicians. It’s not just that it’s a one-way relationship. It’s that your one-way relationship is with a persona that may be quite different from the actual flesh-and-blood person you associate with that persona.
The Mo app here is what we can call the parasocial relationship that most LDS have with General Authorities, particularly the Big 15 that we so often see and hear on a screen at Conference, Church-wide firesides, video clips, or even visits to stake conference. You can know your bishop and possibly your stake president personally, possibly as a friend. That’s just entirely different from how you know (you really don’t) senior LDS leaders.
Let’s ponderize.
- Is an LDS person feeling like he or she knows an apostle when he or she doesn’t know them at all a good thing or a bad thing?
- Is the parasocial gap between the persona you see and hear versus the real-life person greater or less for LDS apostles than for celebrities, athletes, or politicians you also see and hear on screens?
- Have you ever met a celebrity or famous person, only to find they are a much different person in real life than you expected based on your parasocial relationship with their (misleading) public persona?
- Have you ever met an LDS GA, only to find they are a much different person in real life than you expected based on what you saw and heard on screen?
- Or the reverse: Have you ever met a celebrity, athlete, or LDS GA in person only to find that they are much friendlier and more likeable in person that the persona they project on screen?
.
Wheat & Tares 
I doubt most LDS folks have enough contact with General Authorities to have a parasocial relationship with them?
When I think of parasocial relationships, I think about situations where people have extremely repeated media exposure to someone. E.g., social media influencers who may livestream daily or weekly, news anchors who are on the news every evening, etc.,
Unless I’m missing something (and maybe I’m just revealing how out of touch I am lol), I don’t think GAs communicate that frequently. You have General Conference (2x per year), and then probably some devotionals on ad hoc basis (e.g., youth conference, things at maybe BYU. etc.,) but are the GAs really putting that much out there?
I think that the dynamics between members and GAs involve other phenomenon…deference, authority idealization, hero worship, etc., and I agree that those things can be distorted from the reality, but I don’t think those things are the same as parasocial relationships. Like, I don’t think I “know” the GAs. But I might have a distorted expectation of what the role of “prophet” implies and put them on a pedestal precisely because of the *distance* that exists, not out of a false sense of familiarity.
I had an MTC companion who was on a first-name basis with then-apostle Tom, and a few years later, another friend who mentioned his family dinner with their friend Gordon, who by then was serving as the highest ranking member of the church. So not parasocial relationships, but 2 degrees of separation from Mormon royalty? Not gonna lie, this tickled me.
I have had some limited exposure to people whose names almost everyone here would recognize. What I observed from this exposure is that people are people. The rich and famous aren’t that different from the rest of us. I assume that would include members of the Q15.
I’m not from Utah, and I’ve never been to GC in person, so I haven’t had any close encounters with apostles. The only one I saw in person was Richard G. Scott many years ago at a massive multi-stake regional conference (I’m not sure if they still do those). This was in a large rented sports arena in a major west coast city where I lived at the time. I was sitting up in the nosebleeds, having showed up on time instead of 2 hours early like the more zealous attendees who wanted to sit closer. He was too far away to be recognizeable. There were no teleprompters, and this wasn’t a televised event, so his talk was a little less polished and more rambling than what I was used to hearing from him at GC. The subject matter was a mile wide and an inch deep, mostly forgettable. Afterwards, the people around me, as well as all the people I knew who were in attendence, were gushing about how wonderful it was to be “in his presence” and “feeling the spirit” etc. Nobody seemed to remember what he talked about, but all that mattered was being in the same room with an apostle, like the content of the talk was beside the point. Even as a TBM that was weird to me.
Regarding the parasocial phenomenon, I’ve observed this quite a lot among people who have this kind of “relationship” with their favorite podcasters. Podcasting lends itself to the illusion of intimate conversation with the listener and/or interviewee, and most successful podcasters also assume a persona of being a “regular person” rather than an experienced actor or journalist. Devoted listeners talk about their favorite hosts like old friends, despite never having met them. This is not the same as with actors in TV and film, because we know they are playing fictional characters in a ficitonal universe, and there is a sense of separation there.
‘The subject matter was a mile wide and an inch deep, mostly forgettable.’ Perfect description of every talk, devotional, and lesson.
I speculate that the difference between a random actor/podcaster/celebrity is that the apostles are said to represent Jesus Christ himself. Plus they have an aura of infallibility that I believe they purposefully promote.
At BYU years ago Boyd Packer’s granddaughter was in our ward and we all felt a special connection to that apostle. Once I accidentally literally bumped / touched Marvin J Ashton after a conference session (he was tall!) and I always liked him after that. Any conference speaker who talked about something I liked, be it golf, hiking, astronomy, Arizona, whatever, I felt they were talking to me personally. That’s sort of the point.
Spencer Kimball was from my town and his house was across from my childhood church in Arizona. The Eyerings have roots there too. Whether it’s “parasocial” or “collective effervescence” or simple hero worship, there’s no question we place the Q15 on a lofty pedestal.
I think placing leaders on a pedestal is generally not helpful. As a species we have a tend to default to our reptile brain. Respect, sure. Revere, no thank you.
I have spent enough off-the-record time with some of the redchairs to see that they’re just people who aren’t necessarily any more committed than your favorite ward members to doing their best, but they are definitely trying. Many of them were surprisingly charismatic in a smaller group (“why are you so very boring in conference?” I’d think). And—and this still makes me happy to note—none of them exuded the kind of arrogance I’ve seen in too many stake presidents with aspirations. I know others’ mileage with individual redchairs varies. And plenty of their public statements on the party lines appall me. But speaking from my own experience—these are generally good folks who are trying. But they certainly aren’t demigods. And the higher they rise the more insulated they become and the more curated their individual experience with members is. Which I don’t think they like. I remember Elder Hales (RIP) caught me reading _Study in Scarlet_ and we had a really nice talk about why I didn’t find the depiction of Brigham Young or Mormons problematic. I think I even told him the line, “A Mormon marriage is no marriage at all,” kind of resonated with me in the context of polygamy and he looked thoughtful and said something to the effect of “I’m really glad the book doesn’t bother you.” One time Elder Scott sat with me and some sibs while we watched Casa Blanca for a while. That (technically) adulterous kiss between Rick and Ilsa made me squirm given the audience I was with, but he (like any adult!) wasn’t fazed at all. Scott was also VERY clever and good with riddles.
Still, I’d go to lunch with my angel of an octogenarian ministering sister and learn more and leave with my cup fuller than I’d do with any number of the Q15 and 70s I’ve broken bread with (living or dead). I will say Holland always made a special effort to praise and lift the individuals he was with—and while effusive sometimes, it usually stayed on the believable side of sincere.
As a few people have said, people are people. And while these people say things and believe things I think cause real harm sometimes, in person I have found them thoughtful, decent, likable.
I’ve never known one of the 12 but I was casual friends with one of Elder Holland’s sons at one point and he was a genuinely humble and outstanding guy. I’ve had a couple of interactions with 70s over the years and haven’t been nearly as impressed (overheard one well-known 70 getting angry on a phone call with someone, and met an emeritus 70 in a professional setting who was a bit of a jerk, although maybe he was just having a bad day). They’re chosen because they supposedly have business sense, they know the right people, they flatter their superiors, they don’t have a criminal past or scandals, they don’t rock the boat, and they’re male.
I should add that my wife was, many years ago, good friends with someone who’s now a member of the general Relief Society Presidency, and my wife has only good things to say about her. I think in top church leadership there’s a mix of really wonderful people, mediocre people, and everything in between.
My dad was a mission president in Brazil in the 90s while I was a teenager. While there I met Richard Scott and Dallin Oaks. We had dinner with both. Scott have a talk in Portuguese to a congregation and asked me to actually give him some correction where needed. He spoke Spanish much better and had a lot of Spanishisms in his Portuguese, but it was quite impressive that he was able to deliver the talk nonetheless. Honestly they seemed like great people and were really nice to me. They are well aware that the members see them as demigods and do their best to connect and guide where they can. It must be a huge demand on them with their age and health. They seemed like really impressive leaders to me then. I still think that the church leaders are quite impressive as leaders even if they say and uphold things that I am quite sure are untrue.
That said, I never cult-followed or hero-worshipped them or any other church leader for that matter.
I knew President Eyring when I was in my teens. From my teenage perspective, he is a genuinely good person, and I have a lot of both liking and respect.
I knew several people who went on to become GA’s at the Seventy level. Most were real humans, good people with challenges who did their best. One was a con man who used his position to enrich himself while his investors lost everything.
The sister of one of my BYU roommates married the son of a general authority. The son was an arrogant jerk. I thought it was interesting that her family blamed his mother for his selfishness.
I think we feel like we know the general authorities, even though we usually do not. I think the general attitude toward them verges on idolatry, which is wrong and dangerous. I think both we and the institutional church would be healthier if we were more realistic.
Thanks for the comments, everyone. And Happy Thanksgiving to all!
Andrew S, I think some LDS listen and re-listen (or re-watch) Conference talks almost daily. Or view video snippets at LDS.org. Many have a lot more regular engagement with GAs on the screen than you are acknowledging. What effect that has is another question, of course.
Jack Hughes, podcasting and “the illusion of intimate conversation.” Great example.
Trevor H: “I think placing leaders on a pedestal is generally not helpful.” I think the whole system places GAs in a well-defined role that some or many of them are, at certain times, not so comfortable with. The expectations are too high (have all the answers; always kind and considerate and humble; never fall asleep on the stand; get revelation daily) and too narrow.
Margie, on GAs in general: “… none of them exuded the kind of arrogance I’ve seen in too many stake presidents with aspirations.” That’s reassuring.
I tend to agree with Andrew S. and Jack Hughes’s observations that the adoration Church members feel for General Authorities is probably somewhat different than the parasocial relationship people have with podcasters and influencers. Influencers gain followers by being relatable, and someone you aspire to be at the same time. They have to deliberately cultivate that sort of persona. General Authorities, on the other hand, step into a readymade role with an audience already trained to revere them.
A couple decades ago, I was involved in an organization that got to spend time with Apostles in small groups. The Q12 needs to meet important people from other faiths and countries, and I was an assistant in getting those meetings organized. I was invited to attend as an interpreter. The members of the Q12 I met at those meetings were just as gracious to me (an assistant) as they were to the important people in the room. Holland was just as animated in person as he was in his Conference talks (or used to be before he got so sick). He had a passionate discussion about education with some sort of high-level minister in an Eastern European government while I sat at the table and tried to keep up.
My funniest story about meeting an apostle though, was when I just stood and stared at a man in a suit. People were filtering in for a luncheon or something. I was supposed to know who people were to greet them and escort them to a seat. Instead, I was just staring at him in confusion. He looked so familiar but I couldn’t place him. Was he from an Eastern European country and I’d spent the last two days showing him around SLC? Was he an apostle? Who was this guy? Happily, someone came and rescued me, introducing me to Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin. I was not expecting to be nearly a head taller than he was! That Gen Conf pulpit is adjustable, and you can’t tell how short some of the apostles are.
I echo the above commenters who said the General Authorities are warm and personable and sincere. I don’t know any of them in-depth, but the meet and greets, and the meetings and so forth, are good memories.
Still processing my experience from the BYU football game yesterday in Provo, it’s gonna sound far-fetched I know…
My seats were just below the “luxury boxes” so I caught glimpses of several GAs. I could observe my fellow peasant fans continually turning around to gawk at all the Mormon celebs in attendance. Elder Gong was helping to welcome visiting fans to the game which is par for the course while the rest should have been sorting items at Deseret Industries or something more productive. I did see Rasband give a high-five to Uchtdorf after a BYU touchdown, so there’s that…
My mission president is a current Q15 and his wife reminds me of Dolores Umbridge.