Publications on Mormon History

[_Daniel Peterson]

I finally got my copy of Reid L. Neilson and Terryl L. Givens, eds., Joseph Smith Jr.: Reappraisals after Two Centuries (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), with essays by Richard Brodhead, Klaus Hansen, Richard Dilworth Rust, Catherine Albanese, James Allen, Richard Bushman, Terryl Givens, Douglas Davies, Margaret Barker and Kevin Christensen, Laurie Maffly-Kipp, Richard Mouw, Wayne Hudson, Reid Neilson, and David Whittaker.

I just picked up my copy of BYU Studies 47/3 (2008), which, despite its ostensible date, is just off the press. It's a special issue entitled "Mountain Meadows Massacre Documents," and was guest edited by Richard Turley and Ronald Walker. The contents include photographs and transcriptions of important materials from the Andrew Jenson and David H. Morris collections, as well as associated articles and reviews.

And, just this afternoon, I finished editing a wonderful, lengthy review of a recent book on early Mormon polygamy that romps through the standard attacks on Joseph Smith for his alleged sexual libertinism, his supposed arrogance, his purported greed, etc. It will appear in the next issue of the FARMS Review.

There's good stuff, for those who read.





.

[_harmony]

It's a special issue entitled "Mountain Meadows Massacre Documents," and was guest edited by Richard Turley and Ronald Walker. The contents include photographs and transcriptions of important materials from the Andrew Jenson and David H. Morris collections, as well as associated articles and reviews.

What about the parts they left out? (my trust runs so deep...)

[_Daniel Peterson]

What about the parts they left out? (my trust runs so deep...)

Paranoia strikes deep.
Into your life it will creep.
It starts when you're always afraid.
You step out of line, the man come and take you away.

I think you meant to capitalize They.

[_harmony]

What about the parts they left out? (my trust runs so deep...)

Paranoia strikes deep.
Into your life it will creep.
It starts when you're always afraid.
You step out of line, the man come and take you away.

I think you meant to capitalize They.

Paranoia strikes deep in the heartland.
But I think it's all overdone.
Exaggerating this and exaggerating that
They don't have no fun.

Sounds like Provo to me.

[_cinepro]

And, just this afternoon, I finished editing a wonderful, lengthy review of a recent book on early Mormon polygamy that romps through the standard attacks on Joseph Smith for his alleged sexual libertinism, his supposed arrogance, his purported greed, etc. It will appear in the next issue of the FARMS Review.

There's good stuff, for those who read.

This book?

If so, I hope your summary is an exaggeration of the tone of the review. I'm currently reading the book and, while it isn't perfect, I would hardly characterize it that way.

Certainly, it approaches the matter from a "naturalistic" point of view, and so it has far more qualifying words and phrases than would be found in RSR, but it hardly dwells on Joseph's weaknesses to the point that it becomes an overriding theme of the book.

The discussion of Joseph's wives doesn't add much more to the conversation than Todd Compton's book (which is frequently referenced, almost too much), but I think the discussion of other participants in Nauvoo polygamy should be interesting.

Does the review also note that the idea that polygamy was an uninspired mistake isn't just found among critics and anti-mormons, but there are even otherwise faithful members of the Church who can only find peace with the matter by categorizing it on the same shelf as Zelf and the Kirtland Safety Society Bank?

[_harmony]

And, just this afternoon, I finished editing a wonderful, lengthy review of a recent book on early Mormon polygamy that romps through the standard attacks on Joseph Smith for his alleged sexual libertinism, his supposed arrogance, his purported greed, etc. It will appear in the next issue of the FARMS Review.

There's good stuff, for those who read.

If so, I hope your summary is an exaggeration of the tone of the review. I'm currently reading the book and, while it isn't perfect, I would hardly characterize it that way.

I thought he was just using his normal Danielish sarcastic wit. Any time he says something like: "Joseph Smith for his alleged sexual libertinism, his supposed arrogance, his purported greed, ... he's being sarcastic.

Perhaps I am wrong, though.

[_Daniel Peterson]

If so, I hope your summary is an exaggeration of the tone of the review. I'm currently reading the book and, while it isn't perfect, I would hardly characterize it that way.

My sentence was ambiguous, I admit. But I had in mind the review.

And the word romp is mine. I enjoyed the review enormously, thought it great fun. Not because it was intending to amuse, but because it cleared several things up very effectively. I like that.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Any time he says something like: "Joseph Smith for his alleged sexual libertinism, his supposed arrogance, his purported greed," ... he's being sarcastic.

Perhaps I am wrong, though.

You are.

There's not a trace of sarcasm in what you quoted from me, above.

[_Dr. Shades]

And, just this afternoon, I finished editing a wonderful, lengthy review of a recent book on early Mormon polygamy that romps through the standard attacks on Joseph Smith for his alleged sexual libertinism, his supposed arrogance, his purported greed, etc.

So, in your opinion, is there no evidential room for a dispassionate, uninvolved observer to conclude that Joseph could've been a sexual libertine, arrogant, and greedy?

There's good stuff, for those who read.

So what sort of stuff is there for those who don't read?

[_Daniel Peterson]

So, in your opinion, is there no evidential room for a dispassionate, uninvolved observer to conclude that Joseph could've been a sexual libertine, arrogant, and greedy?

You should read the review when it appears.

There's good stuff, for those who read.

So what sort of stuff is there for those who don't read?

There's lots of other stuff. This board, for instance.