I finished reading RSR several weeks ago and thought it was a great book. It took me quite awhile to get through as time allowed, which is not the way I like to read a book.
I had heard about it a couple of years ago from a non-Mormon and when I read a couple of reviews on it. They basically said that it wouldn't effect your views on Mormonism, one way or the other, whether you were LDS or non-LDS, at least the couple that I read.
I have heard it said that Bushman is one of the premiere historians when it comes to Joseph Smith, and I appriciate his work on this book, and thought in my mind that he was pretty fair and balanced with the good, the bad and the ugly regarding Joseph Smith.
I must say at times I felt like I was on a roller-coaster ride at times regarding JS in this book. Sometimes I was shaking my head about JS and then sometimes coming back to a somewhat even keel regarding this man. It seems like Bushman at times would shovel the dirt on him only to bring you back to Josephs way of thinking or perspective or so it seemed to me at times.
The disiplinary council I thought for the most part was a joke, or should I say disturbing. Joseph brought these people in to these councils who had either offended him or had acused him of him of inappropriate behavior in their eyes, and the next thing you know, it's either Joseph's way or the highway or in their case a dirt road.
It seems as though the other party was always shown to be the guilty party by Joseph and the bretheren and that Joseph was alway's right of course. I don't remember one time that JS actually admitted that he was perhaps in the wrong. It was always, always, the other guy--as best that I can remember. Of course, after the offending party would concede to their supposed guilt, the JS would soften his heart and forgive the offender and all would be well in Zion----what a load of BS. (IMO)
I had to respect Oliver Cowdry for standing his ground against JS with his accusation of "the filthy, dirty scandalous affair" regarding Joseph and Fanny Alger. Oliver never recanted his accusation if memory serves me and it wasn't long after that Oliver was ex-communicated. Joseph's main concern was that he was shown not to have committed adultry---why?----because Joseph had taken Fanny to be his 'spiritual wife'---secretly of course. This would have been years before the doctrine came out.
I might not be exactly precise with the info--but I think I'm pretty close--like I say I read it in segments over a too long of a period.
I'm currently reading 'Mormon Enigma:Emma Hale Smith' with about 100 pages to go, and all I can say is-- WOW--hopefully I can get it knocked out by the weekend. I have enjoyed this book even more than RSR.
Yes, to say that JS was human and flawed is an understatment (IMO)--but then aren't we all?
|