Don,
Thank you for the tremendously helpful information.
-Chris
Mike Quinn
-
_Jason Bourne
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9207
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm
DonBradley wrote:Hi all,
On Mike Quinn and Mormonism:
1) Mike Quinn is absolutely a true believer in Mormonism. I've known Mike for sixteen years, and have found him consistent and unwavering in his testimony of foundational LDS beliefs.
Don
Don
Thanks for your summary. The first time I ever heard of Mike Quinn was when I read his Clark bio. And impressive work.
My main point in starting this thread was really that I was fascinated by his strong testimony, and even a bit inspired. The podcast is an old one and so I was wondering where he stood today. It sounds like he is still solidly a believer in the restoration through Joseph Smith.
-
_rcrocket
I claim he has no books published at academic houses on the subject of Mormonism. I was careful in my posts to focus solely on books, and to exclude Church-sponsored publishing houses. As the Wall Street Journal article I've cited stated: "Robert Newman, dean of humanities at Utah, says the history department decided against hiring Mr. Quinn because his research presentation wasn't strong enough and most of his books weren't published by university presses."
You all come back to me, ignoring my original thesis about books and Mormonism, and:
1. You cite essays, not books. I am fully aware of many of his essays.
2. You cite books published at BYU Press or Deseret Books. I am fully aware of the Clark books and I reference them in other emails -- as well as other books.
3. You cite Same Sex Dynamics -- not a book on Mormonism per se. I don't care if you think it a great book; it is not a book on Mormonism per se. But, it is all he has.
4. The Wall Street Journal article says, instead, that Quinn was blackballed by LDS scholars. Such a claim, however, does not undercut my point that he is viewed as very thin on independent publications.
5. I've got it wrong about when Quinn came out. Well, I was an eyewitness and present on the ground, and the Wall Street Journal's claim that he came out in 1996 with his Same Sex Dynamics book is just plain balderdash. Even so, this topic is irrelevant to my point that Quinn is thin on publications.
So, my position is unchanged. Academic houses outside of BYU have not published books he has written on Mormonism. Ergo, he is not in the same calibre as the several historians who have written and published books -- Brodie, Brooks, Kimball Young, Alexander, Morgan, Bushman to name a few.
Do I claim that he is an inconsequential Mormon historian? Not at all. My post was simply a response to the claim that he is the greatest Mormon historian ever. Quite a claim to make given that he has never authored a book about Mormonism published by an academic house outside of BYU Press.
Do I think that he is NOT a Mormon historian. Not at all. But if you are going to rank him as the best ever, I would hope that you could cite definitive books he's written published by academic powerhouses.
rcrocket
You all come back to me, ignoring my original thesis about books and Mormonism, and:
1. You cite essays, not books. I am fully aware of many of his essays.
2. You cite books published at BYU Press or Deseret Books. I am fully aware of the Clark books and I reference them in other emails -- as well as other books.
3. You cite Same Sex Dynamics -- not a book on Mormonism per se. I don't care if you think it a great book; it is not a book on Mormonism per se. But, it is all he has.
4. The Wall Street Journal article says, instead, that Quinn was blackballed by LDS scholars. Such a claim, however, does not undercut my point that he is viewed as very thin on independent publications.
5. I've got it wrong about when Quinn came out. Well, I was an eyewitness and present on the ground, and the Wall Street Journal's claim that he came out in 1996 with his Same Sex Dynamics book is just plain balderdash. Even so, this topic is irrelevant to my point that Quinn is thin on publications.
So, my position is unchanged. Academic houses outside of BYU have not published books he has written on Mormonism. Ergo, he is not in the same calibre as the several historians who have written and published books -- Brodie, Brooks, Kimball Young, Alexander, Morgan, Bushman to name a few.
Do I claim that he is an inconsequential Mormon historian? Not at all. My post was simply a response to the claim that he is the greatest Mormon historian ever. Quite a claim to make given that he has never authored a book about Mormonism published by an academic house outside of BYU Press.
Do I think that he is NOT a Mormon historian. Not at all. But if you are going to rank him as the best ever, I would hope that you could cite definitive books he's written published by academic powerhouses.
rcrocket
-
_DonBradley
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 6:58 am
by the way, I haven't noticed anyone link to Mike's CV, but here it is: http://supportmikequinn.net/cv/
Here are some highlights:
Mike has published, by my count 25 papers in peer-reviewed academic journals, not counting book reviews.
Mike has won (among others) the following awards for his historical scholarship:
Dialogue Foundation, best-article award (1985)
Outstanding Teacher, vote by graduating seniors (1986)
Grace Fort Arrington Award for Historical Excellence (1988)
Publishers Weekly best-book citation (1996)
American Historical Association's Herbert Feis Award for best book by an independent scholar (1997)
"Distinguished Historian" designation at annual meeting of Organization of American Historians (2004)
Since Mike left BYU, he has been a research fellow and/or held other positions with the following institutions:
The Huntington Library
The American Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indiana University-Purdue University
National Endowment for the Humanities
Claremont Graduate University
University of Southern California
Yale University (Beinecke Senior Fellow and Postdoctoral Associate in Yale's Department of History [2002-03])
Whatever defense the University of Utah hiring committee used for not hiring Mike--a decision I have even heard attributed to prejudice against Mike as a Mormon, the idea that Mike hasn't published sufficiently through academic presses isn't true and isn't shared by the far more prestigious institutions that have hosted him.
Indeed, outside of Bob Crocket University and its equivalents Oral Roberts University and BYU-Hawaii, it is difficult to imagine a more distinguished set of US academic institutions with which Mike could have worked.
Don
Here are some highlights:
Mike has published, by my count 25 papers in peer-reviewed academic journals, not counting book reviews.
Mike has won (among others) the following awards for his historical scholarship:
Dialogue Foundation, best-article award (1985)
Outstanding Teacher, vote by graduating seniors (1986)
Grace Fort Arrington Award for Historical Excellence (1988)
Publishers Weekly best-book citation (1996)
American Historical Association's Herbert Feis Award for best book by an independent scholar (1997)
"Distinguished Historian" designation at annual meeting of Organization of American Historians (2004)
Since Mike left BYU, he has been a research fellow and/or held other positions with the following institutions:
The Huntington Library
The American Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indiana University-Purdue University
National Endowment for the Humanities
Claremont Graduate University
University of Southern California
Yale University (Beinecke Senior Fellow and Postdoctoral Associate in Yale's Department of History [2002-03])
Whatever defense the University of Utah hiring committee used for not hiring Mike--a decision I have even heard attributed to prejudice against Mike as a Mormon, the idea that Mike hasn't published sufficiently through academic presses isn't true and isn't shared by the far more prestigious institutions that have hosted him.
Indeed, outside of Bob Crocket University and its equivalents Oral Roberts University and BYU-Hawaii, it is difficult to imagine a more distinguished set of US academic institutions with which Mike could have worked.
Don
Last edited by Guest on Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
_rcrocket
DonBradley wrote:by the way, I haven't noticed anyone link to Mike's CV, but here it is: http://supportmikequinn.net/cv/
Here are some highlights:
Mike has published, by my count 25 papers in peer-reviewed academic journals, not counting book reviews.
Mike has won (among others) the following awards for his historical scholarship:
Dialogue Foundation, best-article award (1985)
Outstanding Teacher, vote by graduating seniors (1986)
Grace Fort Arrington Award for Historical Excellence (1988)
Publishers Weekly best-book citation (1996)
American Historical Association's Herbert Feis Award for best book by an independent scholar (1997)
"Distinguished Historian" designation at annual meeting of Organization of American Historians (2004)
Since Mike left BYU, he has been a research fellow and/or held other positions with the following institutions:
The Huntington Library
The American Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indiana University-Purdue University
National Endowment for the Humanities
Claremont Graduate University
University of Southern California
Yale University (Beinecke Senior Fellow and Postdoctoral Associate in Yale's Department of History [2002-03])
Outside of Bob Crocket University and its equivalents Oral Roberts University and BYU-Hawaii, it is difficult to imagine a more distinguished set of US academic institutions with which Mike could have worked.
Don
Again, I ask you, what books has he authored which have been published by academic houses -- aside from Same Sex Dynamics and those by BYU Press. Wall Street Journal: "Robert Newman, dean of humanities at Utah, says the history department decided against hiring Mr. Quinn because his research presentation wasn't strong enough and most of his books weren't published by university presses."
I mean, what have I missed here? I'm not seeing you do anything except offer things not refuting my original premise -- NO BOOKs.
-
_Mister Scratch
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 5604
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm
DonBradley wrote:Hi Scratch,
I don't know how active DCP was in spreading early rumors about Mike's homosexuality.
Dan Peterson has claimed that he discussed Quinn's sexuality on at least two separate occasions prior to the excommunication in 1993: once during the '80s, at the Los Angeles home of some friend of his, and again in the early 90s, just prior to Quinn's excommunication. (DCP claims that Quinn's homosexuality was one of the main reasons Quinn was ex'ed.) DCP claims that these rumors about Quinn's homosexuality were "widespread"---so widespread, in fact, that The Good Professor was "the last to know" about all of it.
I can tell you that I didn't hear DCP talk about it during discussions I had with him before Mike's "coming out," even though DCP and I talked about sin as a cause of apostasy, and he did report something like this about at least one other prominent scholar. While DCP may (for all I know) have passed on recent rumors about Mike living a gay lifestyle during his BYU employment, I doubt he was spreading such rumors in the early-to-mid 90s.
I'm not so sure that DCP was actually responsible for spreading rumors early on; rather, I've always maintained that he has engaged in rank gossip, especially on the FAIR and MADboards, where DCP has used this whole set of rumors as a means of smearing Quinn.
As far as DCP's rumor activities in the early '90s, he claimed that he had a conversation with a friend, who told him that Quinn's homosexuality was "known to his stake president" (a man named Paul Hanks). DCP has also alluded to a "sad incident" involving Quinn and a member of the ward, but I suspect that this is the same kind of bogus insinuation that DCP was using to try and discredit Robert Ritner.
When you mention Mike's stake president, I assume you mean the one who excommunicated Mike in 1993.
Yes. This man is named Paul Hanks, and it seems clear that he was functioning as an agent for BKP. As to why he felt it was okay to go spreading these rumors, and apparently blabbing about what ought to have been kept private---who knows?
-
_DonBradley
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 6:58 am
Crocket,
You are rigging your standards in order to exclude Quinn. You asked for books from academic presses, and were told that he had published through the University of Illinois Press, and your initial response was, 'what else'?, as though merely one book through an academic press didn't count, because it was merely one. When pressed on this, you further dismissed this book by insisting that the book had to be on Mormon history, and insisting that it was not.
It is.
The title of the book, in case you are incapable of reading even that, much less what lies beyond it, is Same-Sex Dynamics in Nineteenth Century America: A Mormon Example. The book presents and examines homosociality (do you need this defined?) and attitudes toward homosexuality in Mormonism across the history of Mormonism, and particularly in the 19th century. It thus carefully examines an aspect of Mormon history and places it in broader US context and draws implications from it for broader cultural history. These are not, as you imply, mutually exclusive. Quinn doesn't do American cultural history to the exclusion of Mormon history, rather he does American cultural history by doing Mormon history. Your claim that his book is not a work of Mormon history, and that it is a 'history of sodomy,' is entirely vacuous.
The upshot: Quinn has a book on Mormon history (and US cultural history) published through the respected University of Illinois Press.
When presented with a second example of Quinn's publication through a university press--which you would have already known about if you had any familiarity with his career and/or had the insider BYU knowledge from the early 80s which you claim--you again invalidate his publication through a university press and insist that this doesn't count. Why? What is it about "the Harvard of the West," your alma mater, the seat of LDS scholarship, that disqualifies it as an academic publisher?? And if BYU doesn't count, why on earth would you take seriously the FARMS scholars ensconced there? And why would we take you seriously?
Now, a word to the wise (i.e., I've switched audiences): Crocket is a perfect example of why it's a waste of time to engage most online LDS apologists. What about his end of this "discussion" suggests that the exercise is worthwhile? Would anything convince him he's wrong--really? He's not interested in what the truth of the matter might be, only in defending (however poorly) a previously carved out position based on a cock-eyed view of his own faith. (Not all Mormons would see the need to discredit an obviously qualified, if unorthodox, believing Mormon scholar.) Crocket refuses to seriously engage the evidence (rather than twist it and defend against the evidence) or to have any meaningful intellectual 'intercourse' with those of differing viewpoints. His posting constitutes mental masturbation. Why join him in it? WWBKD? (What would Boyd K. do?)
Don
You are rigging your standards in order to exclude Quinn. You asked for books from academic presses, and were told that he had published through the University of Illinois Press, and your initial response was, 'what else'?, as though merely one book through an academic press didn't count, because it was merely one. When pressed on this, you further dismissed this book by insisting that the book had to be on Mormon history, and insisting that it was not.
It is.
The title of the book, in case you are incapable of reading even that, much less what lies beyond it, is Same-Sex Dynamics in Nineteenth Century America: A Mormon Example. The book presents and examines homosociality (do you need this defined?) and attitudes toward homosexuality in Mormonism across the history of Mormonism, and particularly in the 19th century. It thus carefully examines an aspect of Mormon history and places it in broader US context and draws implications from it for broader cultural history. These are not, as you imply, mutually exclusive. Quinn doesn't do American cultural history to the exclusion of Mormon history, rather he does American cultural history by doing Mormon history. Your claim that his book is not a work of Mormon history, and that it is a 'history of sodomy,' is entirely vacuous.
The upshot: Quinn has a book on Mormon history (and US cultural history) published through the respected University of Illinois Press.
When presented with a second example of Quinn's publication through a university press--which you would have already known about if you had any familiarity with his career and/or had the insider BYU knowledge from the early 80s which you claim--you again invalidate his publication through a university press and insist that this doesn't count. Why? What is it about "the Harvard of the West," your alma mater, the seat of LDS scholarship, that disqualifies it as an academic publisher?? And if BYU doesn't count, why on earth would you take seriously the FARMS scholars ensconced there? And why would we take you seriously?
Now, a word to the wise (i.e., I've switched audiences): Crocket is a perfect example of why it's a waste of time to engage most online LDS apologists. What about his end of this "discussion" suggests that the exercise is worthwhile? Would anything convince him he's wrong--really? He's not interested in what the truth of the matter might be, only in defending (however poorly) a previously carved out position based on a cock-eyed view of his own faith. (Not all Mormons would see the need to discredit an obviously qualified, if unorthodox, believing Mormon scholar.) Crocket refuses to seriously engage the evidence (rather than twist it and defend against the evidence) or to have any meaningful intellectual 'intercourse' with those of differing viewpoints. His posting constitutes mental masturbation. Why join him in it? WWBKD? (What would Boyd K. do?)
Don
Last edited by Guest on Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
_DonBradley
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 6:58 am
Hey Scratch,
I didn't know DCP stated he'd discussed Quinn's homosexuality in the 1980s.
For the record, I first heard rumors of his sexual orientation in about 1991. I was told by Blake Ostler's brother Craig some years ago that Blake, who was a friend of Mike and Jan Quinn at the time, had learned about it a few years earlier, in the wake of the Quinns' divorce.
I have reason to believe that Mike did not live a 'gay lifestyle' prior to the divorce. How he has lived since that time isn't something I've ever asked. I don't see it as my business, and don't see how it would change the validity of the historical arguments and sources he presents one way or the other.
Don
I didn't know DCP stated he'd discussed Quinn's homosexuality in the 1980s.
For the record, I first heard rumors of his sexual orientation in about 1991. I was told by Blake Ostler's brother Craig some years ago that Blake, who was a friend of Mike and Jan Quinn at the time, had learned about it a few years earlier, in the wake of the Quinns' divorce.
I have reason to believe that Mike did not live a 'gay lifestyle' prior to the divorce. How he has lived since that time isn't something I've ever asked. I don't see it as my business, and don't see how it would change the validity of the historical arguments and sources he presents one way or the other.
Don
-
_rcrocket
-
_DonBradley
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1118
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 6:58 am
My view of the U of U rationale for not hiring Mike is expressed in a later edit to my post at the top of this page. The rational is defensive, not informational, neither reflects nor changes the reality of Mike's academic credentials, and, like the salamander letter, has been used on this thread as a red herring to distract from Mike's actual academic record.