Daniel Peterson wrote:James Clifford Miller wrote:It contains classic LDS doubletalk so Chapel Mormons will leave its pages with the age-old Official message that (1) Brigham Young didn't order it, (2) the people on the wagon train had it coming, and (3) the Indians did it, anyway.
I just picked up my own copy of
Massacre at Mountain Meadows, and will shortly begin to read it.
I'm wondering whether I, as a Shades-certified "Chapel Mormon," will come away from it with the same impressions that you say you have.
In all that I've heard from the authors, both publicly and in conversation, and in all that I've seen from them in print, they have indeed said that the evidence indicates that Brigham Young didn't order it. But they have emphatically denied that the people in the wagon train "had it coming," and have been quite willing to say that the southern Utah Mormons who were involved bear principal if, indeed, not sole guilt for the massacre. If, contradicting all of their public statements, they have really written that "the people on the wagon train had it coming" and that "the Indians did it, anyway," there will be, to put it mildly, an enormous scandal and outcry. I'll be watching for that.
I have you at a disadvantage, Dr. Peterson, having actually read the book myself where you have just started.
I can tell you, as you'll discover for yourself, that the book DOES explicitly state that the people didn't have it coming. This way critics can't claim it doesn't make the statement. But it also spends much of the narrative on the rumors and presents the southern Utah leaders and populace as reacting to the information in the rumors. Of course, if they're not true, then the southern Utah leaders and populace couldn't be reacting to them. But by focusing a significant amount of narrative on the rumors and their effect in southern Utah, I'm sure Chapel Mormons will remember that part and discount the "they didn't have it coming" part as inconsistent with what they've been taught.
Similarly, the book DOES explicitly state that the vast bulk of the fighting and killing was done by white men and white men disguised as indians. THis way critics can't claim that it doesn't make the statement. But then the book spends much of the narrative on the Indians' fighting and killing that, so much that I'm sure Chapel Mormons will remember that and discount the "white men did most of the killing" part as inconsistent with what they've been taught.
So the critics have been silenced, and the Chapel Mormons get to keep their prior understanding. I wonder if Mr. Turley learned that trick in court when he was still a practicing attorney? "The Indians did much of the killing and fighting?" "Objection!" Judge: "Sustained! The jury will disregard that testimony as contradictory." "The people on the wagon train had it coming?" "Objection!" Judge: "Sustained! The jury will disregard that testimony as contradictor."
It's just like the movie, "Anatomy of a Murder" when Lt. Manion asks his counsel, Paul Biegler (Jimmie Stewart), "how can the jury disregard those remarks?" Biegler responds, "That's just it -- they can't."
James Clifford Miller