Grant Hardy on the Book of Mormon

[Daniel Peterson]

From Publishers Weekly:

A First Look at the Stars: Starred Reviews Coming in PW February 8

Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader

[volgadon]

I hope Rob Bowman takes a look.

[Brant Gardner]

I've seen the review copy, and I agree.

Not having that advantage, I ordered mine on the basis of other things he has written. I do not expect to be disappointed--except in the wait for the publication date (can't come fast enough).

[Sevenbak]

This looks fantastic. I will be getting one for sure.

But for a minute, I thought this was a book by Chad Hardy on the BoM, and I threw up in my mouth a little.

[Somebodyz]

Another book for my list.

[cdowis]

Hardy teases out the unique voice of each narrator, showing particular nuance as a student of character.

I suggested awhile back that different personalities are evident in the BOM narrative. I think Nephi has a particularly aggressive manner, and it would be interesting to compare him with Jacob and Alma.

Another suggestion I have made is the possibility that the narrative is influenced by oral tradition, as well as written records. Mormon's comments at the beginning of 3 Nephi shows some interesting nuances, Alma in the city of Ammoniah. There seem to be loose ends in certain parts of the text -- the sequence of events are not tightly held together very well in the Ammonihah narrative.

Others have already looked at the complex narrative of the record keeping itself, documenting the chain of possession, for example. It appears that the small plates were "lost" to the Nephites in general, where doctrines were later restored which were already expressed in the small plates.

The changes in society, from the small villiages of Nephi, and even Mosiah finally to the "big city" society of Alma and later Nephi. Others have looked at the integration of the Nephites and Mulekites. Clearly there were tensions as evidenced by the rebellion of the kingmen, for example. These were probably Mulekites, unhappy over the dominance of the Nephites.

In the Pundit's section, there is a major thread on human sacrifice in Nephite society -- which has important implications for Nephite political power. I made some casual comment, and the whole thing went crazy. But it shows how deeply we can dig into the BOM.

Having spent a great deal of time reading and studying the BOM, I constantly see "wierd stuff" like the reference to human sacrifice. But often I can't exactly put my finger on it until it slips out in a post. The references to "others" was like that. Now we see such subtle things that we missed before, lying just below the surface.

Anyway, I hope Hardy's study is the beginning of examining the nuances and complexities of the BOM text, beyond the religious and doctrinal aspects.

[Gervin]

That whole publisher's weekly write-up is strange.

What does it mean that "too often, the Book of Mormon has been dismissed out of hand by ... the faithful who accept it as gospel truth (without having read it carefully"? How do the faithful dismiss the Book?

[LifeOnaPlate]

How do the faithful dismiss the Book?

Some of the faithful don't pay due attention to the book.

[LeSellers]

Some of the faithful don't pay due attention to the book.

All too true.

Why, one wonders, does it take a prophet to challenge us to read it, and especially to read it once in a year? I know people who have read it once a month (along with the other standard works), and they are the ones who understand they understand only the smallest piece of the truths it contains.

Lehi

[Rich Hansen]

All too true.

Why, one wonders, does it take a prophet to challenge us to read it, and especially to read it once in a year? I know people who have read it once a month (along with the other standard works), and they are the ones who understand they understand only the smallest piece of the truths it contains.

Lehi

Is it all possible, that the reason the BofM is so little read by rank-and-file members, is because they find it uninteresting?

[charity]

Is it all possible, that the reason the BofM is so little read by rank-and-file members, is because they find it uninteresting?

Could we ask why anyone who says they believe in God and accept the fact that the Book of Mormon contains the word of God, would find His word uninteresting?

[TJane]

I'm so EXCITED to see this new book coming out by Grant Hardy. He married my sister's college friend and they used to come to our dinner and game parties,oh, so many years ago at BYU. He is amazing! His "Book of Mormon:Reader's Edition" saved my scripture reading bacon as my ADHD makes it difficult to read scriptures in their official LDS format. Isaiah is so much more understandable written as the poetry it is.

I'm not much of a scholar as many of you, but this sounds like a book I must get.

Jane

[LifeOnaPlate]

Is it all possible, that the reason the BofM is so little read by rank-and-file members, is because they find it uninteresting?

No doubt some members do. It would be rather naive to assume every single member of the church is enraptured by the Book of Mormon. Nevertheless, many members have found the book to contain powerful messages--even those who aren't familiar with the book in its entirety. It takes work to understand a complex book like the BoM. As for me, I find the BoM remarkably interesting in addition to the spiritual fulfillment I receive from its teachings.

[Rich Hansen]

Could we ask why anyone who says they believe in God and accept the fact that the Book of Mormon contains the word of God, would find His word uninteresting?

Feel free to ask. Why do you suppose most members don't seem to be interested in reading the BofM?

[LifeOnaPlate]

Feel free to ask. Why do you suppose most members don't seem to be interested in reading the BofM?

I don't suppose that. In fact, I find it to be flatly false. Rich, I haven't been around the board for a while enough to know what your situation or angle is, so your comment might be in jest. That's a charitable reading. If you're serious, I can't take you serious.

[Daniel Peterson]

Is it all possible, that the reason the BofM is so little read by rank-and-file members, is because they find it uninteresting?

It's certainly possible.

It's also possible that they find it difficult.

So?

I think it's very likely, in any given year, that Stephen King will outsell Homer, Dante, and Milton combined. Kenneth Branagh's 1993 film of Shakespeare's Much Ado about Nothing grossed $22.5 million in the United States. The next year, Dumb and Dumber grossed $127.2 million.

[Rich Hansen]

I don't suppose that. In fact, I find it to be flatly false. Rich, I haven't been around the board for a while enough to know what your situation or angle is, so your comment might be in jest. That's a charitable reading. If you're serious, I can't take you serious.

It has been my observation, that most members spend very little time reading the BofM. Few are students of the BofM, some read regularly, but, in general, most seldom crack it open. I have come to this conclusion having spent years as an instructor both in priesthood quorums, Gospel Doctrine class and church leadership positions. Granted, the wards and stakes I have participated in may not be the norm. BTW, I am not picking on the BofM. I think the same could be said for other LDS scripture as well. People may believe in it and yet, find it difficult, dull or not particularly engaging.

You are welcome to not take me serious.

[Greg Smith]

It has been my observation, that most members spend very little time reading the BofM.

Yup. Many North Americans generally spend very little time reading anything.

Gallop 2005 found less than half were reading a book at any given time (i.e., had a book in progress that they were reading):

http://books.google.ca/books?id=WOug0pzW6_IC&pg=PA204&lpg=PA204

31% had read more than 10 books in the last year (1 a month, essentially)

Only 6% had read more than 50. (1 a week)

(83% had at least "started" a book during the year. Which means that 17% had not even tried to read a book in the last year. The implications for politics, science, and religion are serious.)

BTW, I am not picking on the BofM. I think the same could be said for other LDS scripture as well. People may believe in it and yet, find it difficult, dull or not particularly engaging.

Indeed, the same could be said for any scripture or any book. We are living in a post-literate age, and younger people are less likely to read than older, so it is probably going to be an increasing issue.

That said, the Church's youth seem to do better at reading scriptures than their parents, probably from seminary--or so my non-scientific survey seems to suggest.

GLS

[All-Seeing Eye]

Just read the Grant Hardy testimony.

Harry Reid passing the sacrament and attending the temple? Really? Somehow, I can't see it. But then, I can't say for sure.

[Sargon]

All-Seeing Eye says: Somehow, I can't see it.

[LifeOnaPlate]

It has been my observation, that most members spend very little time reading the BofM.

Your observation, anecdotal and completely incomplete, can't bear the weight you hang on it. Whether it's true or not.

Few are students of the BofM, some read regularly, but, in general, most seldom crack it open. I have come to this conclusion having spent years as an instructor both in priesthood quorums, Gospel Doctrine class and church leadership positions. Granted, the wards and stakes I have participated in may not be the norm. BTW, I am not picking on the BofM. I think the same could be said for other LDS scripture as well. People may believe in it and yet, find it difficult, dull or not particularly engaging.

Your comment reminds me of the character in a Philip Roth novel who explained that in his youth,

[Obiwan]

Is it all possible, that the reason the BofM is so little read by rank-and-file members, is because they find it uninteresting?

"Boring"..... Where do people get their logic sometimes?

Every religion, every class, every business, every sport, every aspect of LIFE itself has those who put MORE EFFORT into the thing than others, or at least more "constant" effort. As well, everyone is at different "levels" and points in their lives, as well as have different priority's at those different points. Such does not translate into "finding something uninteresting". It's simple priorities.

Grow up buddy and get a clue!

[cksalmon]

From Publishers Weekly:

In Hardy

[Daniel Peterson]

Perhaps, I suppose, BoM is finally getting the literary treatment it deserves, one that "eschews tiresome debates about the Book of Mormon's historical authenticity."

I don't find the question of the Book of Mormon's historical authenticity even remotely "tiresome," and I'm reasonably sure that Grant doesn't either. But there is certainly room for different approaches to texts.

I take the Bible seriously as history, but enjoy reading about the Bible as literature, too. Why would anybody believe that the two methods of analysis are mutually exclusive? Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire and Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War are, at one and the same time, both great works of literature and monumental works of historiography.

[sethpayne]

Perhaps, I suppose, BoM is finally getting the literary treatment it deserves, one that "eschews tiresome debates about the Book of Mormon's historical authenticity."

I agree. I too find the historicity debate fairly tiresome. Reasonable outsiders can clearly see the Book's literary genius. The question of historicity is one of faith, not scholarship, IMO.