Popular Post cinepro Posted April 28, 2015 Popular Post Posted April 28, 2015 (edited) BYU and Deseret Book are publishing a book about the translation of the Book of Mormon, and according to the FAIR blog these are some of the pictures that are included in it. These are interesting times for Mormon studies and apologetics! Book Notice Edited April 28, 2015 by cinepro 9
BookofMormonLuvr Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 Good. Truth is nothing to be scared of. So what if Joseph used a hat as an instrument in the translation process? The book is still true! 3
BookofMormonLuvr Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 Michael McKay was one the the presenters at the "Book of Mormon in Zion Conference" we had not too long ago. I enjoyed his presentation and basic message, "Don't let the naysayers define your history. Be bold and proud of how it went down, no apologies." 2
Nevo Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 I hate to be a naysayer, but this isn't how witnesses described the translation process. "[T]he scribes and others who observed the translation left numerous accounts that give insight into the process. . . . Most of the accounts speak of Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim (either the interpreters or the seer stone), and many accounts refer to his use of a single stone. According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument." (https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng)
cinepro Posted April 28, 2015 Author Posted April 28, 2015 I hate to be a naysayer, but this isn't how witnesses described the translation process. "[T]he scribes and others who observed the translation left numerous accounts that give insight into the process. . . . Most of the accounts speak of Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim (either the interpreters or the seer stone), and many accounts refer to his use of a single stone. According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument." (https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng) Baby steps!
Buckeye Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 I hate to be a naysayer, but this isn't how witnesses described the translation process. "[T]he scribes and others who observed the translation left numerous accounts that give insight into the process. . . . Most of the accounts speak of Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim (either the interpreters or the seer stone), and many accounts refer to his use of a single stone. According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument." (https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng) This was my thought as well. Maybe these are "action shots" but they're not depictions of what Joseph was doing during the actual translation. That said, I do appreciate the attempt to make things more accurate. It may just be that the nature of the translation process does not lend itself very well to a nice acceptable drawing. Faces are important. Regardless of historical issues, there simply may be now way to make an appealing image of the back of Joseph's head with a hat covering his face. 2
CV75 Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 BYU and Deseret Book are publishing a book about the translation of the Book of Mormon, and according to the FAIR blog these are some of the pictures that are included in it.I like the matching sweater vests and the high efficiency (blue-burning) lamp.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 I hate to be a naysayer, but this isn't how witnesses described the translation process. "[T]he scribes and others who observed the translation left numerous accounts that give insight into the process. . . . Most of the accounts speak of Joseph’s use of the Urim and Thummim (either the interpreters or the seer stone), and many accounts refer to his use of a single stone. According to these accounts, Joseph placed either the interpreters or the seer stone in a hat, pressed his face into the hat to block out extraneous light, and read aloud the English words that appeared on the instrument." (https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-translation?lang=eng)"Naysayer" is not the word I would use. "Quibbler," perhaps. Or "nitpicker." Maybe "whiner." Why couldn't the art be regarded as depicting the moment just before his face is pressed into the hat? 1
cinepro Posted April 28, 2015 Author Posted April 28, 2015 I like the matching sweater vests and the high efficiency (blue-burning) lamp. I like how the illustrator still felt compelled to include what appears to be the cloth-shrouded plates on the table. It's like we still need to believe that the plates were at least nearby. 2
Buckeye Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 "Naysayer" is not the word I would use. "Quibbler," perhaps. Or "nitpicker." Maybe "whiner." Why couldn't the art be regarded as depicting the moment just before his face is pressed into the hat? "Nitpicking" sounds a little odd coming from the grammer police. Yes, the artwork could be about the moment before translation, but according to Fair Blog post it is meant to depict the actual translation: The book includes a number of original pieces by Sweat depicting Joseph Smith’s translation of the Book of Mormon by peering into a seer stone at the bottom of a hat. Below are three of the new pieces, taken from Sweat’s public Instagram page. ... P.S., I'm well aware of the correct spelling of 'grammar.'
Scott Lloyd Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 (edited) "Nitpicking" sounds a little odd coming from the grammer police. Yes, the artwork could be about the moment before translation, but according to Fair Blog post it is meant to depict the actual translation: ... P.S., I'm well aware of the correct spelling of 'grammar.'So the "actual translation" did not entail, at some point in the process, placing the stone in the hat, then picking up the hat preparatory to pressing his face into it? You said it yourself: "Faces are important." That's something would-be news photographers learn very early on. I presume artists learn it too. You're going to begrudge the most minimal endeavor to make the art piece visually appealing even while trying to meet demands for accuracy? Incredible. Edited April 28, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
ALarson Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 Wasn't the purpose of using the hat to press against Joseph's face and block out the sunlight so he could see the words? Why not show that in at least one of the pictures? So, they decide to show Joseph preparing to translate in each illustration? Well, this is progress. And as someone already stated, "baby steps". 1
Scott Lloyd Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 Wasn't the purpose of using the hat to press against Joseph's face and block out the sunlight so he could see the words? Why not show that in at least one of the pictures? So, they decide to show Joseph preparing to translate in each illustration? Why not? What about providing a caption explaining that it is the moment before he places his face into the hat? Well, this is progress. And as someone already stated, "baby steps". Give me a break.
ALarson Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 Why not? What about providing a caption explaining that it is the moment before he places his face into the hat?That would be great. Then how about an illustration of Joseph actually translating the Book of Mormon? I'm sure this will eventually happen in church publications.
Popular Post Nevo Posted April 28, 2015 Popular Post Posted April 28, 2015 Yes, I'm nitpicking, but given that the whole raison d'être of the book is to provide an accurate, detailed account of the translation of the Book of Mormon based on the latest scholarship, I think it's warranted. Particularly since the authors and the illustrator know better. 5
Nevo Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 Then how about an illustration of Joseph actually translating the Book of Mormon? I'm sure this will eventually happen in church publications. Probably not in my lifetime, but maybe in the lifetime of my children. Maybe 50 years from now members will finally see Joseph's face all the way into the hat. 1
ALarson Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 (edited) Yes, I'm nitpicking, but given that the whole raison d'être of the book is to provide an accurate, detailed account of the translation of the Book of Mormon based on the latest scholarship, I think it's warranted. Particularly since the authors and the illustrator know better.Agreed. And, aren't there existing accurate illustrations that actually show Joseph translating with his head in his hat? Why draw up completely different ones that only show him preparing to translate? Edited April 28, 2015 by ALarson
rodheadlee Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 (edited) It's amazing the things people get excited about. I learned an old Chinese proverb last week. History is a handmaiden and you can dress her up anyway you like. Edited April 28, 2015 by rodheadlee 3
Buckeye Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 So the "actual translation" did not entail, at some point in the process, placing the stone in the hat, then picking up the hat preparatory to pressing his face into it? You said it yourself: "Faces are important." That's something would-be news photographers learn very early on. I presume artists learn it too. You're going to begrudge the most minimal endeavor to make the art piece visually appealing even while trying to meet demands for accuracy? Incredible. We'll probably just have to disagree. For me the distinction matters. The whole purpose of the hat is to block out light. Leaving his face out of the hat materially affects the accuracy of the depiction. As far as these pictures are concerned, there's no reason for the hat to be there at all ... except of course to hide the stone from view. 1
JulieM Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 I have to admit that if I saw these and didn't know how Joseoh really used the hat to translate, it would be confusing. Especially if the only illustrations I'd seen previously were the inaccurate ones published and exhibited by the church. Cinepro, does the script going along with the pictures at least better describe the process (use of the seer stone. pulling the hat tightly around his face and so on)? If so, that would help.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 What I really want to know is, when is this art going to be canonized? 1
Scott Lloyd Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 Yes, I'm nitpicking, but given that the whole raison d'être of the book is to provide an accurate, detailed account of the translation of the Book of Mormon based on the latest scholarship, I think it's warranted. Particularly since the authors and the illustrator know better.I'm guessing the authors and illustrator are assuming at least a minimal level of intelligence and alertness on the part of the prospective reader, enough for the reader to understand clearly from texts and perhaps captions what is being conveyed in the illustrations. Perhaps I'm wrong in that assumption.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 I have to admit that if I saw these and didn't know how Joseoh really used the hat to translate, it would be confusing. Especially if the only illustrations I'd seen previously were the inaccurate ones published and exhibited by the church. Cinepro, does the script going along with the pictures at least better describe the process (use of the seer stone. pulling the hat tightly around his face and so on)? If so, that would help.So you're saying you wouldn't be apt to read any of the text, only look at the pictures?
ksfisher Posted April 28, 2015 Posted April 28, 2015 I like how the illustrator still felt compelled to include what appears to be the cloth-shrouded plates on the table. It's like we still need to believe that the plates were at least nearby. If the plates were not somewhere nearby how would we know that it was Joseph Smith and that it was the Book of Mormon being translated? 2
Recommended Posts