Re: A History of Jo's Spiritual Wifeism
Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:26 pm
I kind of feel it necessary, after being attacked about my use of emphasis to perhaps explain myself. The narrative I am presenting is complicated. When any historian presents a narrative, they think about the sources they use and how they apply to the premise the author is trying to convey. (This is when they are ready to write up the research they have studied) That means that they analyze the evidence and then present their evidence as to how they think the historical narrative played out. There may be one or more possibilities, there may be none. There may be only best guesses. It all depends on the evidence.
There are different ways to do this. One is to write a book, which would cover vast amounts of material and explore many options and detail how the author arrived at their conclusions. One is to write an essay or article and present their premise in a more limited fashion.
Many authors have written books on Joseph's Spiritual Wife System. Some wrote one book, some multiple volumes. This exercise by me here, is BASED on the research I have been doing for the last four years. It is my theory, or conclusions I have reached by analyzing evidence I've discovered, or that others have presented. What I am not going to do, is take other's conclusions and debate them or try and debunk them in any great detail or depth. This is not anything planned out. I'm just presenting this "off the cuff" so to speak. I think I can do so here, and make it interesting and informative. But this isn't all set in stone, so to speak. It is my theory of how I think events played themselves out, using mine and others research. I may present some of other's research and comment on it, if I think it relevant. I may not, so read on with all of this in mind.
If I emphasize certain parts of quotes, it is because I feel that those parts are relevant to what I feel led to events that brought about Joseph's Spiritual Wife System. There is much more to Mormon History (in those eras) than what I have presented so far. That much is obvious to anyone who has studied it. What I am giving is in many cases a bare bones summary based on certain events that I feel have bearing on why polygamy was practiced by Joseph Smith. I'm not writing a book, or writing an Essay to answer every one of every other author's conclusions. But I will answer questions if anyone has them, about what others have concluded about certain events.
For example, there are those who feel that Joseph married Fanny Alger in some kind of ceremony. I'm not one of them. Lots of authors have written papers and written in books about their relationship. I feel the evidence that best fits the circumstances is that their relationship was as Oliver Cowdery described it, an affair. Therefore, this narrative will reflect that view. Emphasizing certain parts of quotes doesn't mean that I have disrearded the parts that I feel may not be relevant. People can read the entire quote for themselves and determine as they go along whether or not my emphasis takes it out of context. I don't feel that I do this, but some may not agree. That is what DISCUSSION is all about. I'm open to any discussion on why I might emphasize parts of quotes. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to debate the pros or cons of using emphasis. That is just a silly diversion.
I know the readers here are smart enough to go to other authors or researchers if they feel that what I'm presenting is too lopsided or biased. You can present evidence or bring up their arguments and I'll debate them. I welcome any debate on this, and feel I can defend my own conclusions and the use of emphasis in certain cases. Something might be emphasized in Part I or II, etc., that will have bearing on later parts of this presentation. Again, many will not see the whole picture, and I hope there will be questions along the way. I'll endeavor to answer them as I can.
No answer is going to please everybody. I'm sure many will find my research and conclusions controversial, because I disagree with many parts of the established historical narrative about Joseph's Spiritual Wifeism. For example, I do not believe that Emma Smith ever participated in ANY of Joseph's marriages. I believe that she was aware of many of her husband's relationships with his spiritual wives. I believe that Joseph pressured her to accept them. I believe she never did, not really. They made some kind of deal, but no one really knows what it was. There are hints, but that is all. So analyzing Emma's behavior and statements and why she spoke and acted certain ways before and after and during the Nauvoo Era is extremely important. The burden of convincing others that I'm right or that there is a possibility I'm right about this, is on me. Anyone has the right to question my conclusions about this. I welcome those questions.
I hope I have answered some of the questions raised about my use of emphasis with certain quotes. To say that doing so is some kind of "trick" is silly. I urge anyone who reads what I've posted here, to study all of the quote and go to the source for total context. (And if a source is not listed, just ask and I will provide it). That is what I did. Hopefully, as people do this, they will see why I have drawn certain conclusions.
What some may not realize, is that I did address why I emphasized certain parts of quotes in my first post. But that did not satisfy the person who tried to derail that thread, because they wanted to get into a debate about how others used ellipses (not relevant at all) or how people were just too stupid to not read the entire quote -- only the bolded text -- or how using emphasis was some kind of "trick" to get people to not read the whole quote. That, to me, is ludicrous, people are smarter than that. You must have a dim view of people to believe such nonsense or promote it.
EDITED TO ADD:
THIS EXERCISE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ESSAY THAT IS GOING TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE JWHAJ. THIS IS NOT TAKEN FROM ANYTHING BUT MY OWN RESEARCH.
There are different ways to do this. One is to write a book, which would cover vast amounts of material and explore many options and detail how the author arrived at their conclusions. One is to write an essay or article and present their premise in a more limited fashion.
Many authors have written books on Joseph's Spiritual Wife System. Some wrote one book, some multiple volumes. This exercise by me here, is BASED on the research I have been doing for the last four years. It is my theory, or conclusions I have reached by analyzing evidence I've discovered, or that others have presented. What I am not going to do, is take other's conclusions and debate them or try and debunk them in any great detail or depth. This is not anything planned out. I'm just presenting this "off the cuff" so to speak. I think I can do so here, and make it interesting and informative. But this isn't all set in stone, so to speak. It is my theory of how I think events played themselves out, using mine and others research. I may present some of other's research and comment on it, if I think it relevant. I may not, so read on with all of this in mind.
If I emphasize certain parts of quotes, it is because I feel that those parts are relevant to what I feel led to events that brought about Joseph's Spiritual Wife System. There is much more to Mormon History (in those eras) than what I have presented so far. That much is obvious to anyone who has studied it. What I am giving is in many cases a bare bones summary based on certain events that I feel have bearing on why polygamy was practiced by Joseph Smith. I'm not writing a book, or writing an Essay to answer every one of every other author's conclusions. But I will answer questions if anyone has them, about what others have concluded about certain events.
For example, there are those who feel that Joseph married Fanny Alger in some kind of ceremony. I'm not one of them. Lots of authors have written papers and written in books about their relationship. I feel the evidence that best fits the circumstances is that their relationship was as Oliver Cowdery described it, an affair. Therefore, this narrative will reflect that view. Emphasizing certain parts of quotes doesn't mean that I have disrearded the parts that I feel may not be relevant. People can read the entire quote for themselves and determine as they go along whether or not my emphasis takes it out of context. I don't feel that I do this, but some may not agree. That is what DISCUSSION is all about. I'm open to any discussion on why I might emphasize parts of quotes. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to debate the pros or cons of using emphasis. That is just a silly diversion.
I know the readers here are smart enough to go to other authors or researchers if they feel that what I'm presenting is too lopsided or biased. You can present evidence or bring up their arguments and I'll debate them. I welcome any debate on this, and feel I can defend my own conclusions and the use of emphasis in certain cases. Something might be emphasized in Part I or II, etc., that will have bearing on later parts of this presentation. Again, many will not see the whole picture, and I hope there will be questions along the way. I'll endeavor to answer them as I can.
No answer is going to please everybody. I'm sure many will find my research and conclusions controversial, because I disagree with many parts of the established historical narrative about Joseph's Spiritual Wifeism. For example, I do not believe that Emma Smith ever participated in ANY of Joseph's marriages. I believe that she was aware of many of her husband's relationships with his spiritual wives. I believe that Joseph pressured her to accept them. I believe she never did, not really. They made some kind of deal, but no one really knows what it was. There are hints, but that is all. So analyzing Emma's behavior and statements and why she spoke and acted certain ways before and after and during the Nauvoo Era is extremely important. The burden of convincing others that I'm right or that there is a possibility I'm right about this, is on me. Anyone has the right to question my conclusions about this. I welcome those questions.
I hope I have answered some of the questions raised about my use of emphasis with certain quotes. To say that doing so is some kind of "trick" is silly. I urge anyone who reads what I've posted here, to study all of the quote and go to the source for total context. (And if a source is not listed, just ask and I will provide it). That is what I did. Hopefully, as people do this, they will see why I have drawn certain conclusions.
What some may not realize, is that I did address why I emphasized certain parts of quotes in my first post. But that did not satisfy the person who tried to derail that thread, because they wanted to get into a debate about how others used ellipses (not relevant at all) or how people were just too stupid to not read the entire quote -- only the bolded text -- or how using emphasis was some kind of "trick" to get people to not read the whole quote. That, to me, is ludicrous, people are smarter than that. You must have a dim view of people to believe such nonsense or promote it.
EDITED TO ADD:
THIS EXERCISE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ESSAY THAT IS GOING TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE JWHAJ. THIS IS NOT TAKEN FROM ANYTHING BUT MY OWN RESEARCH.