Has John Gee Been "Booted" from the Maxwell Institute?

[_Tom]

I notice that Dr. Gee’s profile has been removed from the MI scholars page: https://mi.BYU.edu/personnel/scholars

The MI needs to put out an announcement.

What section of ANE will Dr. Gee be in? (I notice that he’s teaching Akkadian this fall.) http://ane.BYU.edu/department-administration/

[_RockSlider]

Book of Abraham, pure poison, what a curse it seems for anybody who defended it. What a shame when once again the good of the church throws individuals who have dedicated their lives to the cause are tossed under the bus.

[Guest]

I notice that Dr. Gee’s profile has been removed from the MI scholars page: https://mi.BYU.edu/personnel/scholars

The MI needs to put out an announcement.

What section of ANE will Dr. Gee be in? (I notice that he’s teaching Akkadian this fall.) http://ane.BYU.edu/department-administration/

Wow, he was there just a few hours ago.

[_Gadianton]

I first heard about this from one of the Brethren ten days ago. Fluhman may or may not have known that John Gee would soon escape from his control. Like Dan Peterson, I have also seen a copy of the memo to Fluhman that shifted John Gee, with the Bill Gay chair

So Midgley both heard about this from one of the Brethren, and also he saw a copy of the memo of the realignment? Essentially, a person has no privacy rights when employed at BYU? This is a little ridiculous.

by the way, I take it with a real grain of salt when an apologist says they've "seen a memo" about something. I don't know, but I think it might be a kind of deep (and lets face it, borderline psychotic) longing to be one of the celebrated witnesses to the golden plates or a beholder of a patriarchal autograph. When reality stands or falls upon witness statements about source documents, the incentive to fantasize about source documents in a way that allows the testifier to stick fingers in ear and Trump anything anyone else is saying, surely on occasion brings such a fantasy into imagined reality.

[_Gadianton]

then what is the explanation for the move?

According to Midgley, it seems as if the ark door opened for Gee to enter prior to the floods coming.

[_Shulem]

Has John Gee Been "Booted"

I'm starting to think so.

[_kairos]

Wait a minute- this move indicates no one is protecting Joseph Smith papyri from attack ! This cannot happen- "Kerry, we want Kerry!" and Kerry bring your sword with you, it's better you fall on your own Sword than get kicked to the curb and run over by a MI bus!

I also nominate Woody M. As the Mopologist snitch of year - I had no idea he was so close to the Brethern as to be a confident on personnel Issues. Go Woody, but check your back - I think I hear a bus revving up!

k

[_Shulem]

blah blah

Smoot baby likes boys?

[_Doctor Scratch]

I notice that Dr. Gee’s profile has been removed from the MI scholars page: https://mi.BYU.edu/personnel/scholars

The MI needs to put out an announcement.

What section of ANE will Dr. Gee be in? (I notice that he’s teaching Akkadian this fall.) http://ane.BYU.edu/department-administration/

Hi there, Tom. I wonder if you gave us a bad link? I'm not seeing any signs that Dr. Gee is scheduled to teach in the fall.

I agree with you that it would be useful if the MI would say something. I assume that Blair Hodges et al. have decided that silence is the better move at the moment, and I don't blame them for thinking that. By the way: it appears that all mention of Gee--save for his publications--has been eliminated from the MI website. Scrubbed clean, as it were.

I think that the MI people are in a difficult spot, to be honest. Sometimes, as the B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetics Studies, I feel that I've got a duty to speculate, and so that's what I'll do.

Let's suppose the the Mopologists' statements (vague as they have been) are correct. John Gee has a new appointment, complete with BYU's version of "tenure," and this happened because... Well, I don't know if you noticed, but they gave no reason at all. Peterson noted that Gee was unhappy at the MI, and that things were less than "congenial." (What does that mean, I wonder?) So many details are missing here. Still, in their telling of the story, this was an indisputable positive: it happened for all the right reasons. What would those reasons be, though? In an ideal world, it would mean that Gee's work as an Ancient Near East Languages scholar had distinguished himself in the field, and the ANEL department at BYU would be over-the-moon thrilled to have him on board. But that's not what Peterson said. Even in Peterson's own telling, this isn't about Gee's prowess as an academic; he portrays it instead as a "relief"--like the Maxwell Institute was such a scummy hive of betrayal that merely getting away from it has to be seen as a huge accomplishment. But that says an awful lot, doesn't it? I do wonder what the Mopologists are up to. They may be making their calculations in such as way as to try to deliver the most pain possible to the Maxwell Institute.

So, if you are the "damage control" team at the MI, what do you do? The Mopologists' story doesn't make any sense, but whatever. One option--the one they've explored to this point--is to say nothing, which is usually a good choice when you're dealing with a "yahoo" element like DCP, who carries life-long grudges and will do everything in his power to hurt you and humiliate you. (Hodges knows this from personal experience.) Still, let's assume that the Mopologists' version is semi-true. Does the MI acknowledge that? They could, without so much as skinning their knee: all they would have to do is say, "We are sad to see the great John Gee go, but he is moving on to a Continuing Status professorship over at ANEL, and he will remain the Gay Research Chair. We wish him the very best in his new endeavors." You would expect something like this if the Mopologists' story is correct--even if there are sour grapes over at the MI.

That said, it is far more likely that the Mopologists are lying to some extent. What if the rumor, posted by starsshine1942 is correct, and Gee had been on probation for a long time, and he was basically "ejected" and given some pittance appointment as a favor? If you are the MI, do you affirm that this is correct? The "new" Maxwell Institute wants scholarly credibility, and doesn't want to be dragged into the kind of gossip mongering and smear tactics that are the Mopologists' stock in trade. So what should they say? If sharsshine's post is true, then they cannot give the kind of laudatory announcement that I described above: that would be deceptive. So do they just state the facts, without providing any details: something like, "John Gee is no longer with the Maxwell Institute. We wish him well in his future endeavors."

But we have to remember that there are some significant things in play, such as the Gay Research Chair. The Mopologists are publicly insisting that it is now housed in the Department of Ancient Near Easter Languages. Is there any evidence for that, though? It may be that DCP publicly stated this as a tactic. In order to "clear the air," the MI will inevitably have to wade into the muck of the apologists and dirty their hands, and then Midgley, DCP, Wyatt, Smoot, and others will say: "Look! They are engaging in smear tactics against Gee!" Etc.

I wish the Maxwell Institute folks the best, but they are in a quandary at the moment. I agree with you, Tom, that they should say something, even if via non-official channels.

[_Dr. Shades]

In my experience -- in the wake of the 2012 Purge -- defamation and innuendo were very much a part of the new Maxwell Institute program.

Unlike the old FARMS Review of Books, which was neither of those things?

I had hoped that those days were past, but perhaps I was too optimistic.

Irony much?