"face In The Hat Translation" - New Pictures In An Lds Book!

[JulieM]

So you're saying you wouldn't be apt to read any of the text, only look at the pictures?

Did you even read what I wrote? I asked about the script and said it would help if there was a written description of how he used the seer stone and hat for translation.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Did you even read what I wrote? I asked about the script and said it would help if there was a written description of how he used the seer stone and hat for translation.

Bro. McKay is very thorough in explaining the use of the hat in the translation process. I heard him explain it in-person recently.

[Senator]

Regardless, this book will still be educational to some/many members of the church, who will see the depictions of the hat and say, "hey, where's the Urim and Thummim"?

 

On second thought, those that are apt to make such a response, are exactly those that would probably never read the book. To reach those, you would need to put it in the sunday school curriculums.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Senator

[ALarson]

Regardless, this book will still be educational to some/many members of the church, who will see the depictions of the hat and say, "hey, where's the Urim and Thummim"?

I agree and I thought of this too.  It will at least hopefully lead members to study about the translation process more in detail.  The church essay describes the process quite well too.

Edited April 28, 2015 by ALarson

[Scott Lloyd]

Did you even read what I wrote? I asked about the script and said it would help if there was a written description of how he used the seer stone and hat for translation.

I guess I thought that already should have been clear from the link:

 

Co-authored by Michael Hubbard MacKay and Gerrit J. Dirkmaat of the Joseph Smith Papers (and both assistant professors of Church history and doctrine at BYU) and with original artwork by Anthony Sweat, the book looks closely at the history of the translation and publication of the Book of Mormon in the years 1827–1830. MacKay and Dirkmaat draw from the cutting-edge research of the Joseph Smith Papers Project in their reconstruction of the Book of Mormon’s translation and publication, including some heretofore unknown or underutilized historical sources. Topics touched on in the book include:

• The retrieval of the plates.
• Martin Harris’ visit with Charles Anthon and other savants.
• Early reactions and accounts of Joseph Smith’s finding of a “Gold Bible.”
• The method and instruments of the translation.
• Attempts to secure a copyright for the publication of the Book of Mormon, including the attempt to secure a copyright in Canada.
• The 3 and 8 Witnesses.

 

(Bold-face emphasis mine.)

[Nevo]

Regardless, this book will still be educational to some/many members of the church, who will see the depictions of the hat and say, "hey, where's the Urim and Thummim"?

 

It will be less educational to members who only see the cover:

 

[Boanerges]

Baby steps!

Yes. These are far better than the incorrect depictions of Joseph sitting there with one finger on the plates and dictating the words - something that apparently never actually happened. These sorts of depictions have been around for years and it's time to move on from those notions. I have no problem with showing Joseph's face in the pictures - how else are we supposed to know who is doing it? I chalk that up to artistic license. Having one of him with his head buried in the hat wouldn't hurt, I suppose, but I personally don't need that.

[CV75]

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.  

Or to include the classroom student desks and chairs--are those metal legs?--and the roomy high-ceiling study.

[pogi]

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.  

 

That part of the painting actually does agree with historical accounts to some degree.

 

"Emma said that she remembered the plates being on a table in the house, wrapped in a linen tablecloth, which she moved from time to time when it got in the way of her chores."

 

Smith, Joseph III (October 1, 1879), "last Testimony of Sister Emma", The Saints' Herald 26 (19): 289.

 

I had to chuckle to think that they actually "got in the way" of Emma's chores.  It makes them seem so mundane, and perhaps they were as it seems their only real purpose was to provide witnesses to them.  

 

Do you think Emma ever peaked?  How could she not? 

Edited April 28, 2015 by pogi

[bcuzbcuz]

"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?

"Quibbler", "nitpicker", "whiner". Really? Or are you just trying to "steady the ark"?

Granted, showing Joseph holding a hat is a step forward from previous pictures showing him with the plates in front of him and the scribe sitting behind a curtain, but Joseph actually had his head buried in the hat, not held at a distance from his face while he translated.

But if you're OK with him merely holding his hat in front of himself, do you do the same while watching sports? Do you turn off the basketball game as the ball bounces around the rim? Do you switch channels just as the quarterback cocks his arm for the throw?

Are you just as happy when you read a novel when someone has torn out the last ten pages?

The church is slowly, sometimes painfully such, revealing the milk and meat of the early years of the restoration. For me, I'd rather have the events portrayed acurately instead of ******footing around the known truth.

[pogi]

"Quibbler", "nitpicker", "whiner". Really? Or are you just trying to "steady the ark"?

Granted, showing Joseph holding a hat is a step forward from previous pictures showing him with the plates in front of him and the scribe sitting behind a curtain, but Joseph actually had his head buried in the hat, not held at a distance from his face while he translated.

But if you're OK with him merely holding his hat in front of himself, do you do the same while watching sports? Do you turn off the basketball game as the ball bounces around the rim? Do you switch channels just as the quarterback cocks his arm for the throw?

Are you just as happy when you read a novel when someone has torn out the last ten pages?

The church is slowly, sometimes painfully such, revealing the milk and meat of the early years of the restoration. For me, I'd rather have the events portrayed acurately instead of ******footing around the known truth.

 

Are you suggesting this was intentionally done to deceive, as if it is somehow more believable if his head was not firm against the hat or something?  Whether his head was firm against the hat or a few inches away, what difference does it make?   I think the explanation is more of an artistic one as Buckeye suggested. 

Edited April 28, 2015 by pogi

[Nevo]

Whether his head was firm against the hat or a few inches away, what difference does it make?

 

None, except that one conforms to the eyewitness descriptions and the other doesn't. If historical accuracy isn't important to you, then it's not a big deal.

[Scott Lloyd]

Are you suggesting this was intentionally done to deceive, as if it is somehow more believable if his head was not firm against the hat or something?  Whether his head was firm against the hat or a few inches away, what difference does it make?   I think the explanation is more of an artistic one as Buckeye suggested. 

This thread has brought a new dimension to the expression "getting caught up in the thick of thin things."

 

This is me registering frustrated incredulity ----->

Edited April 28, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

None, except that one conforms to the eyewitness descriptions and the other doesn't. If historical accuracy isn't important to you, then it's not a big deal.

So your saying a picture of him moving the hat up to his head preparatory to pressing his face into it somehow does not conform "to the eyewitness descriptions"?

[mormonnewb]

Yes. These are far better than the incorrect depictions of Joseph sitting there with one finger on the plates and dictating the words - something that apparently never actually happened. These sorts of depictions have been around for years and it's time to move on from those notions. I have no problem with showing Joseph's face in the pictures - how else are we supposed to know who is doing it? I chalk that up to artistic license. Having one of him with his head buried in the hat wouldn't hurt, I suppose, but I personally don't need that.

 

I'm going to do the unthinkable and side with Team Church on this one.  This is a great improvement from past depictions and you have to allow some license when it comes to art depicting religious events.  And in this case, I'm going to just assume that the artist wanted to make sure that we saw JS' face so that the reader would know AT A GLANCE who was doing the translating.

 

I liken it to the numerous depictions of Samson with a bodybuilder's physique.  Nothing in the text of the story says that he was muscular and there is much to argue against it.  After all, repeatedly, people came to him asking about the source of his strength.  I suspect that no one ever approached, say, Arnold Schwarze (you know how to spell the rest) and said, "How in the world do you lift all of those heavy weights?"  However, by depicting Samson as having rippling muscles (just like me ... hehe), it's easy to pick him out of the picture.

 

In fact, in this light, I have to give the Church some credit because it's really hard to change visual images on people.  For example, most depictions of Noah's ark still have curved ends when the text is quite clear that the boat was rectangular in shape. Also, it is my understanding that curved ends allow a boat to cut through water more easily, aiding in navigation and speed.  However, the ark wasn't going anywhere.  So why would HF specifically require all of that effort for nothing?  However, most Biblical illustrators still draw the ark in the traditional manner.  And I suspect that this isn't an effort to "hide the truth" about the ark's true shape, but rather because no one would recognize it.

 

So, this one time, I'm going to assume that the artist was simply trying to make JS recognizable and justifiably sacrificed a tiny amount of accuracy to do so.  No harm, no foul.

Edited April 28, 2015 by mormonnewb

[Buckeye]

So your saying a picture of him moving the hat up to his head preparatory to pressing his face into it somehow does not conform "to the eyewitness descriptions"?

 

Descriptions of what? The preparation or the translation? Surely you can understand that it would be inaccurate to describe this picture as "Moses engaging in the game of stick-pulling." Granted, he could be preparing for such a game, but he's not doing it yet.

 

[Calm]

For those of you concerned about historical accuracy...

 

The artist includes an explanation of why he made certain choices, including the face not directly in the hat for some of the art.

 

According to a friend who has seen the book, at least one of the sketches does show him with his face in the hat (I got the impression there were more), the others that did not have him that way were chosen to present the scene differently due to feedback from those he showed his work to that they were confused by the picture.  Apparently being able to see Joseph's face was more informative to them than not being able to see it.

 

I suggest waiting to see the actual contents of the book before complaining about the artist's choices.  

Edited April 28, 2015 by calmoriah

[ALarson]

For those of you concerned about historical accuracy...

 

The artist includes an explanation of why he made certain choices, including the face not directly in the hat for some of the art.

 

According to a friend who has seen the book, at least one of the sketches does show him with his face in the hat (I got the impression there were more), the others that did not have him that way were chosen to present the scene differently due to feedback from those he showed his work to that they were confused by the picture.  Apparently being able to see Joseph's face was more informative to them than not being able to see it.

 

I suggest waiting to see the actual contents of the book before complaining about the artist's choices.  

That's really interesting, calmoriah.  Hopefully there will be more pictures, like you said.  Thanks for posting this additional information.

 

I do have to ask though...

 

Do you really think people wouldn't know it was Joseph with his head in the hat (even if you couldn't see his face)?  He was the one doing the translating and dictating to the person sitting with the pen and paper.  I just think that's an odd excuse to use.  But, I agree that we should just wait and see the final copy of the book.

Edited April 28, 2015 by ALarson

[Nevo]

I suggest waiting to see the actual contents of the book before complaining about the artist's choices.  

 

Ouch.

[Calm]

The artist's (a Church History professor...nice combination) essay is reportedly excellent in discussing the conflict between art and historical accuracy in conveying messages and includes interviews from other LDS artists on their experience, apparently some having attempted to work on this subject as well but never feeling they got it right.

 

Combine that with the most recent findings of the JSP used in order to present a thorough and accurate story of the translation and publication of the Book of Mormon....sounds like it is the latest must have book for church history fans.

[JulieM]

The artist's (a Church History professor...nice combination) essay is reportedly excellent in discussing the conflict between art and historical accuracy in conveying messages and includes interviews from other LDS artists on their experience, apparently some having attempted to work on this subject as well but never feeling they got it right.

Combine that with the most recent findings of the JSP used in order to present a thorough and accurate story of the translation and publication of the Book of Mormon....sounds like it is the latest must have book for church history fans.

Sounds like it'll be a great essay! Thank you, calmoriah. You always add the most interesting and helpful information!! Edited April 28, 2015 by JulieM

[Calm]

 

 

Do you really think people wouldn't know it was Joseph with his head in the hat (even if you couldn't see his face)?  He was the one doing the translating and dictating to the person sitting with the pen and paper.  I just think that's an odd excuse to use.  But, I agree that we should just wait and see the final copy of the book.

I got the impression the final illustration he was working towards is meant to be eventually used in all contexts of teaching which would include Primary and knowing Primary and how some kids have a problem keeping track of conversations with their tendency to wander (and honestly some teens are like that as well), I can see why it might be necessary to show his face.

 

I am interested to read the feedback portions as well as the other artists' experiences to see if it matches my guesses over the years.

[Calm]

Sounds like it'll be a great essay! Thank you, calmoriah. You always post the most interesting and helpful information!!

It is all about getting friends to do the hard work and then getting credit by posting what they've told me.

[ALarson]

I got the impression the final illustration he was working towards is meant to be eventually used in all contexts of teaching which would include Primary and knowing Primary and how some kids have a problem keeping track of conversations with their tendency to wander (and honestly some teens are like that as well), I can see why it might be necessary to show his face.

I agree with this.  I can see combining pictures of Joseph preparing to translate and then show him actually translating in other pictures.  That makes sense.

[Calm]

I got sent a view of an actual face in the hat sketch and boy, his face is shoved down in there....you guys would all be proud.