Is the LDS Church now resigned to its history?

[ERCougar]

Just to be clear, not all of the September 6 were ex'd for telling the real history of the church.

Right. In fact, I know some things about Quinn that probably led to his excommunication. Stuff I'm not really willing to share.

Oh ok...he's gay.

[SeattleUte]

I don't mean disrespect here. I think Signature Books does some important things, and I understand some of its books are beloved and praised, but how prestigious is Signature Books in the overall scheme of things? I note that this is where Quinn published his books. So, he didn't publish them with a university press, and he published them with a very small press that is pretty parochial in its focus and mission. I assume it's not like publishing with Oxford like Givens has (Oxford actually publishes a lot of non-academic popular stuff now).

[Jeff Lebowski]

I don't mean disrespect here. I think Signature Books does some important things, and I understand some of its books are beloved and praised, but how prestigious is Signature Books in the overall scheme of things? I note that this is where Quinn published his books. So, he didn't publish them with a university press, and he published them with a very small press that is pretty parochial in its focus and mission. I assume it's not like publishing with Oxford like Givens has (Oxford actually publishes a lot of non-academic popular stuff now).

Completely irrelevant. Quinn's books are cited as widely or more widely than just about any other LDS historian, Givens included. Givens is brilliant and I love his work, but he hasn't had anywhere near the impact Quinn has had.

Your little crusade to discredit Quinn is bizarre. But it is fascinating to watch, so knock yourself out.

[Jeff Lebowski]

SU, you should check out this talk given by Quinn in 1981 when he was still on the BYU faculty. He systematically deconstructs directives/admonitions for "faithful history" by E.T. Benson, Boyd K. Packer, and Louis Midgley and makes a wonderful argument for an honest "warts and all" approach to LDS history. That took some real courage and is probably one of the reasons BKP worked behind the scenes ten years later to orchestrate his excommunication.

http://www.mormonismi.net/kirjoitukset/quinn_mormonihistorioitsija.shtml

In many ways Quinn took one for the team is now being vindicated (the article you linked is an example). He was ahead of his time.

[SeattleUte]

Completely irrelevant. Quinn's books are cited as widely or more widely than just about any other LDS historian, Givens included. Givens is brilliant and I love his work, but he hasn't had anywhere near the impact Quinn has had.

Your little crusade to discredit Quinn is bizarre. But it is fascinating to watch, so knock yourself out.

You don't understand your icon. It means you've been stupid and you've just figured it out. I don't think that's what you meant.

Anyway, I was alluding to the Utah dean's criticism that Quinn had not published in prestigious enough organs. I am curious about Signature. I'm sure it's a stellar little press, but publication there doesn't necessarily translate into a faculty appointment at a university.

I'm not out to discredit Quinn. I certainly wish him the best. However, I don't think it's necessarily so that he didn't land a coveted tenured or tenure track position because LDS high rollers blackballed him. I would not mind it to be so, but I'm skeptical. That was your point and that is all I'm challenging. The WSJ article was a puff piece and clearly a product of a PR firm. The only direct evidence of why Quinn hasn't landed a faculty position was provided by the Utah dean. Was Quinn at BYU employed by the LDS CES?

I certainly didn't mean to elevate Givens. From what I've seen Givens' output is garbage.

[Jeff Lebowski]

You don't understand your icon. It means you've been stupid and you've just figured it out. I don't think that's what you meant.

It's also a face palm. Expresses frustration.

Anyway, I was alluding to the Utah dean's criticism that Quinn had not published in prestigious enough organs. I am curious about Signature. I'm sure it's a stellar little press, but publication there doesn't necessarily translate into a faculty appointment at a university.

You were clearly cherry-picking for that quote as you blithely ignored this one right before it:

When Mr. Quinn came to the school's Salt Lake City campus for a job interview, history professor James Clayton hosted a reception for him. Prof. Clayton had been Mr. Quinn's friend for years, and joined him in criticizing church censorship. He describes Mr. Quinn as the second-best historian of Mormonism, behind retired Columbia University professor Richard Bushman.

...

I'm not out to discredit Quinn. I certainly wish him the best. However, I don't think it's necessarily so that he didn't land a coveted tenured or tenure track position because LDS high rollers blackballed him. I would not mind it to be so, but I'm skeptical. That was your point and that is all I'm challenging.

I certainly didn't mean to elevate Givens. From what I've seen Givens' output is garbage.

lol. Please name one book or article you have read by Givens. Be honest.

While you are at it, please name any book in the realm of LDS studies you have read in the past 35 years. Book reviews don't count.

[SeattleUte]

lol. Please name one book or article you have read by Givens. Be honest.

While you are at it, please name any book in the realm of LDS studies you have read in the past 35 years. Book reviews don't count.

I will be honest with you. As you know, I am not interested in LDS studies. It's like puffins. Who would spend years and years reading dozens of books about puffins? Puffins are interesting, but one book is more than enough. I get it. I got it when I was 23. I made a decision then that was very hard to make and I've never looked back and the decision is looking better all the time. Since then, LDS studies have not interested me.

I've read the Book of Mormon straight through three times. The other standard works once straight through and my favorite passeges of the Bible over and over again. I've read the Autobiography of Parley P. Pratt, The History of the Latter Day Saints by Arrington (not bad), No Man Knows My History (classic), Jesus the Christ by Talmadge (overrated but informative to a degree), The Great Apostasy by Talmage (awful even when I believed), A Marvelous Work and a Wonder (ditto), Book of Mormon Studies by Roberts (ahead of his time), various essays by Truman Madsen and Hugh Nibley and lots of correlated stuff.

That's enough LDS Studies to last a lifetime. I'm not going to read Givens' thinly veiled apologetics. All I need to do is read the review and I get it.

[Jeff Lebowski]

IOW, nothing in the last 35 years. I rest my case.

[ERCougar]

Questions for both of you:
Who's better qualified to direct a Mormon Studies chair (or whatever the proper term would be)? SU-I understand that you don't think these should exist, but you can at least understand how there might be some academic interest in one of the most important American religions/religious phenomena? If you don't like Quinn's qualifications, whose do you like?
And JL, I'm still not quite buying this theory about Mormon donors blackballing him. What about Jan Shipps (I think that's her name?)--she's navigated a career well enough. What happens to the professorship--does it just disappear? I would buy it if Quinn were more anti- in his stance. But he's not. He still publishes in Dialogue and Sunstone and I have a hard time believing that there aren't wealthy donors who at least see the value in both of those publications. I think something else is going on.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Questions for both of you:
Who's better qualified to direct a Mormon Studies chair (or whatever the proper term would be)? SU-I understand that you don't think these should exist, but you can at least understand how there might be some academic interest in one of the most important American religions/religious phenomena? If you don't like Quinn's qualifications, whose do you like?
And JL, I'm still not quite buying this theory about Mormon donors blackballing him. What about Jan Shipps (I think that's her name?)--she's navigated a career well enough. What happens to the professorship--does it just disappear? I would buy it if Quinn were more anti- in his stance. But he's not. He still publishes in Dialogue and Sunstone and I have a hard time believing that there aren't wealthy donors who at least see the value in both of those publications. I think something else is going on.

Jan Shipps is a non-LDS academic who has always been kind and generous towards the Church. Everyone adores her, even the apologists. Quinn is a former BYU prof who has been excommunicated and is gay. HUGE difference.

Quinn is perceived as anti by some because he has published things that are embarrassing to the church (albeit true), such as post-manifesto polygamy, JS dealing with magic and the occult, and power struggles in the LDS heirarchy. Keep in mind that his SP excommunicated him for apostasy. But by today's standards, there is no way he would be exed as times have changed. But as a gay ex-mo, I think he is just radioactive enough to be black-balled.

[UtahDan]

Completely irrelevant. Quinn's books are cited as widely or more widely than just about any other LDS historian, Givens included. Givens is brilliant and I love his work, but he hasn't had anywhere near the impact Quinn has had.

Your little crusade to discredit Quinn is bizarre. But it is fascinating to watch, so knock yourself out.

Not only are his books citrd frequently, but he is the only source anyone can site for a number of things. The reason for this is that he has seen documents from the church archives they don't let anyone look at any longer. That might be changing, but it has been true up until now.

[Northwestcoug]

SU has a point, somewhat. Quinn is past his prime by about 15 years. He could have continued to be a huge influence in Mormon studies for longer. But the blame for that can be laid squarely at BYU and the church. It's too bad, really, because he was a first-rate historian and a true believer.

Another tidbit in the WSJ article is that the church threatened to withdraw funding from a Yale symposium if it allowed Quinn to speak. So yeah, Quinn was blackballed.

Anyone who doubts Quinn's influence as a scholar should read his post-manifesto polygamy article. It is thorough and well-written.

http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=15581

[Indy Coug]

So has Quinn been rebaptized?

[LA Ute]

So has Quinn been rebaptized?

Not sure, but he does seem to have been canonized.

[Pheidippides]

Not sure, but he does seem to have been canonized.

Didn't we already treat you to one of these in another thread?