Love this church newsroom article. Stick to true stories!

[bsjkki]

I suck at grammar and struggle with it. I do like truth and think when there are known untrue elements of an oft repeated story, as a church, we should seek to rectify the situation, so it doesn't continue to be repeated. The church seems to agree with me on this. They do update manuals and lessons as more information is learned. 

11 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Exactly! I edited my post above with these same ideas as you were writing.

This is precisely why, from the very beginning, the key to conversion has always been personal experience. I was not in the grove with Joseph, but I've had my own grove moments. These incline me to accept what Joseph said, but -- and this is key! -- I would still believe what I have experienced even if Joseph fabricated or embellished his stories. My quest for knowledge may have been inspired by what he said, but what I have come to know is independent of his 'history'.

At the same time, there is another principle that applies here, and it's the same one that Paul taught in 1 Corinthians 8 regarding whether the Saints should worry about eating meat that had been sacrificed to false idols:

The 'liberty' of a post-modern approach to narrative is fine ... right up till it becomes a stumblingblock to others who, for whatever reason, may be more reliant (for now) on the 'factual' stories of others.

When I read this Paul H Dunn came to mind. The experience you shared was faith promoting and showed an answer to prayer. I would totally believe the experience happened and was real. But, if later I found out you never lived in Jakarta, I would have to conclude you were lying. Then the value of hearing your faith promoting experience would no long exist. I would conclude you had issues, but it would not affect my faith. 

Some of the historical stories that have been often repeated were embellished in the retelling and some lacked context because even the participants were not fully aware of what occurred. The story of Hawn's Mill is true but there is much we have learned that at the time was not known to those experiencing the event. I find the account of historians who pieced together a fuller account by researching the accounts of many witnesses fascinating. New Insights and Interpretations of Hawn’s Mill Massacre - Church News and Events (churchofjesuschrist.org) Based on legal documents, the spelling of 'Haun' has been updated. 

"Addressing another past supposition, Brother Baugh asserted that the Mormons at Hawn’s Mill did not intentionally disobey Joseph Smith’s order to move in closer to Far West for safety.

“Because of the hostile activities of the Livingston/Daviess County regulators against the Mormons living at Hawn’s Mill, Jacob Hawn was appointed to go to Far West to seek counsel concerning whether or not they should continue to maintain the mill site and remain in the area,” Brother Baugh said. “The Prophet informed him that they should abandon the mill so as to not risk the lives of the Saints living there. However, when Hawn returned, he reported that Joseph Smith said they could stay and maintain the mill.”

I know this fuller history with more context is a comfort for those who are decedents of those who survived this tragedy. I do not believe this primary lesson would have been written in quite the same way knowing what we now know. Lesson 31: The Extermination Order (churchofjesuschrist.org) 

*We also learned Jacob Hawn was not a member of the church. 

Edited July 25, 2022 by bsjkki

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It was not even your post I was referring to. It was the one from bsjkki. It apparently used the quotation marks  for text emphasis, and yes, such usage is a pet peeve of mine. 🤷‍♂️ 

Oops, I did it again. Gotta watch that.

I understand pet peeves; mine is "....which begs the question..." used as a substitute for "which raises the question...". 

A "question begging definition" is one that includes circular reasoning, including in the definition one of the terms it is allegedly defining, like "Truth- a true statement that discusses something real"

That stuff drives me NUTS and we see it hereabouts daily.

Another one is using ampersands for...wait for it... *emphasis*, or quotation marks.

Grrrr.   

 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

I do like truth and think when there are known untrue elements of an oft repeated story,

The problem is that we all see things differently because we all have our own perceptions of what is allegedly happening.

I will accept and respect the church's interpretation not because it is infallible, but because it is an institution we respect and the one writing the story automatically creates a standardized basis around which discussion can proceed.

Even scriptures are written by men, but these stories are not scripture 

Peace, out!

[Chum]

7 hours ago, Calm said:

People derailing threads to criticize others’ grammar is rapidly developing into a pet peeve of mine.

And bluntly, it seems to violate the spirit of the board rules, if not the letter (and I realize I am as well by doing the same in response):

A proper evolution would have given me enough thumbs hold up for this.

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Tacenda said:

But not since him has that happened with the prophets.

How do you know it has not?  The original revelations were probably all published for at least two reasons, because it was a new experience to many*** and also to show how things were done. Once it was clear how things operated, why publish them anymore?  Remember the first mission calls…many of these revelations were published, but many were not. If you look at even Joseph’s revelations, later ones were less likely to included in the canonized version (I have a book of unpublished revelations of JS, but unfortunately packed away if I haven’t purged it; later I will try and find something online to back me up).

Added:  a quick look at the Doctrine and Covenants shows the first five years of the Church from 1830-1835 have almost 20 revelations per year for most with a high around 30 for 1832. After that they start dropping and getting fewer every year. Iirc 1840 is completely skipped. Yet we know revelations were being received during this time. 
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/chron-order?lang=eng
 

***

Quote

Though published texts could potentially lead to misinterpretation or heresy, they also provided Latter-day Saints and potential converts with a banner to rally around. Believing they were guided by commandments issued directly from God to Joseph Smith endowed early Mormons with a sense of exceptionalism that helped bind converts to the community of Saints. Early in his ministry, before the revelations had been published widely, Joseph Smith was fairly accessible to his followers. As the church grew, however, he necessarily became less so, and a smaller proportion of the church membership had regular contact with him and therefore with the community-building, faith-affirming power of his revelations. Publication allowed more people to access and interpret the revelations—the element of the new religion that drove every aspect of its doctrine and practice.

https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/intro/introduction-to-revelations-and-translations-volume-2

Once the community had other characteristics to hold it together, the necessity of publishing revelations constantly lessened over time. 

Edited July 25, 2022 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Oops, I did it again. Gotta watch that.

I understand pet peeves; mine is "....which begs the question..." used as a substitute for "which raises the question...". 

A "question begging definition" is one that includes circular reasoning, including in the definition one of the terms it is allegedly defining, like "Truth- a true statement that discusses something real"

That stuff drives me NUTS and we see it hereabouts daily.

Another one is using ampersands for...wait for it... *emphasis*, or quotation marks.

Grrrr.   

 

I certainly agree with you about “begging the question.”

I’ve not seen ampersands used for emphasis or in place of quotation marks. That seems pretty weird. 

[Rain]

5 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Oops, I did it again. Gotta watch that.

I understand pet peeves; mine is "....which begs the question..." used as a substitute for "which raises the question...". 

A "question begging definition" is one that includes circular reasoning, including in the definition one of the terms it is allegedly defining, like "Truth- a true statement that discusses something real"

That stuff drives me NUTS and we see it hereabouts daily.

 

5 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Another one is using ampersands for...wait for it... *emphasis*, or quotation marks.

Grrrr.   

 

Ampersand or asterisk?

I haven't seen an asterisk used in those cases, but I have seen them used (and have personally done this) a lot as a virtual action. As in sending someone a virtual hug: *hug* or *drops jaw*.  Though these days people are more likely to do hugs some version of this way: ((hug))

[bsjkki]

And thanks to the grammar Nazis, another thread devolves. 😞

[Hamba Tuhan]

8 hours ago, Tacenda said:

The thing that I don't understand sometimes is the constant revelation from God on minute things like land exchanges and different little small things that Joseph had with the Lord in the D&C. But not since him has that happened with the prophets. I mean it'd have been nice to know the big things but I'd accept little too. So I think Joseph just had it in his mind that the Lord wanted him to do certain transactions. And I feel like the visions were in his mind as well and didn't happen in the physical.

I think you've just illustrated my point by interpreting the situation through the lens of your personal experience, just as I interpret the situation through the lens of mine. 

[Tacenda]

11 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I think you've just illustrated my point by interpreting the situation through the lens of your personal experience, just as I interpret the situation through the lens of mine. 

[Rain]

One of the concerns with sharing untrue stories is the Spirit.

First, if some feel the Spirit when an untrue story is shared but the concept is true and the person later hears the story is not true they begin to doubt that they felt the Spirit at all.  

Second, emotions and the Spirit are often so mangled together.  Sometimes the Spirit makes you feel emotional, but sometimes we mistake the emotional thing for a Spiritual thing.  So if an untrue story makes us emotional and then we mistake that for the Spirit we may in this case begin to doubt when the Spirit is speaking to us in other cases.  And there are an awful lot of those untrue stories that seem meant to bring on the emotions.

This makes me glad the church is speaking out on it.

PS - I don't feel emotions are bad.  The Savior mourned with people.  The problem is when we confuse emotions with the Spirit.

[Rain]

52 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

And thanks to the grammar Nazis, another thread devolves. 😞

I'm sorry for being a part of it.  

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

Ampersand or asterisk?

Uh oh

You are right. Do not post while watching tv. 

[Scott Lloyd]

9 hours ago, bsjkki said:

I suck at grammar and struggle with it. I do like truth and think when there are known untrue elements of an oft repeated story, as a church, we should seek to rectify the situation, so it doesn't continue to be repeated. The church seems to agree with me on this. They do update manuals and lessons as more information is learned. 

When I read this Paul H Dunn came to mind. The experience you shared was faith promoting and showed an answer to prayer. I would totally believe the experience happened and was real. But, if later I found out you never lived in Jakarta, I would have to conclude you were lying. Then the value of hearing your faith promoting experience would no long exist. I would conclude you had issues, but it would not affect my faith. 

Some of the historical stories that have been often repeated were embellished in the retelling and some lacked context because even the participants were not fully aware of what occurred. The story of Hawn's Mill is true but there is much we have learned that at the time was not known to those experiencing the event. I find the account of historians who pieced together a fuller account by researching the accounts of many witnesses fascinating. New Insights and Interpretations of Hawn’s Mill Massacre - Church News and Events (churchofjesuschrist.org) Based on legal documents, the spelling of 'Haun' has been updated. 

"Addressing another past supposition, Brother Baugh asserted that the Mormons at Hawn’s Mill did not intentionally disobey Joseph Smith’s order to move in closer to Far West for safety.

“Because of the hostile activities of the Livingston/Daviess County regulators against the Mormons living at Hawn’s Mill, Jacob Hawn was appointed to go to Far West to seek counsel concerning whether or not they should continue to maintain the mill site and remain in the area,” Brother Baugh said. “The Prophet informed him that they should abandon the mill so as to not risk the lives of the Saints living there. However, when Hawn returned, he reported that Joseph Smith said they could stay and maintain the mill.”

I know this fuller history with more context is a comfort for those who are decedents of those who survived this tragedy. I do not believe this primary lesson would have been written in quite the same way knowing what we now know. Lesson 31: The Extermination Order (churchofjesuschrist.org) 

*We also learned Jacob Hawn was not a member of the church. 

That was a fascinating presentation by Alex Baugh. I learned a great deal from it, notwithstanding having known about the Hawn’s Mill episode since childhood. I’m pleased to have been in a position to write that report and thereby had a hand in bringing it to the attention of the public. 
 

Brother Baugh is a real treasure in the Church. His research and writing are clear-eyed, candid and professional, yet nothing he has produced has ever disillusioned me about the history and faith of the Latter-day Saints. It has had the contrary effect, in fact. I’m proud to have been able to form a friendship with him over the years. 
 

Added later: I’ll just mention that, apart from his talents as a researcher and scholar, I’ve never known a more likable and amiable person than Alex Baugh. 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[Kenngo1969]

On 7/25/2022 at 11:34 AM, mfbukowski said:

... That stuff drives me NUTS and we see it hereabouts daily.

Another one is using ampersands for...wait for it... *emphasis*, or quotation marks.

Grrrr.   

 

Those are asterisks, Brother.  This is an ampersand: Ken & Mark, Brothers in Spirit Forever.  

[Hamba Tuhan]

On 7/26/2022 at 3:34 AM, mfbukowski said:

Another one is using ampersands for...wait for it... *emphasis*, or quotation marks.

The use of asterisks for emphasis has a solid history. It emerged in plain-text computer applications (like email) that originally lacked options for bolding or italicising. In some of the applications I use now, like Facebook Messenger, using the asterisks actually makes the word appear bold.

Edited July 27, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Those are asterisks, Brother.  This is an ampersand: Ken & Mark, Brothers in Spirit Forever.  

Hey man, they both start with A! Just a tad of senility.... AND watching TV at the same time. Actually though TV alone could make a 20 year old instantly senile! 

And clearly that's supposed to be MARK getting top billing! 😡

 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

The use of asterisks for emphasis has a solid history. It emerged in plain-text computer applications (like email) that originally lacked options for bolding or italicising. In some of the applications I use now, like Facebook Messenger, using the asterisks actually makes the word appear bold.

I think it’s a useful, albeit fairly new, convention, especially in environments where ALL CAPS is the only other means of showing emphasis and many are apt to confuse that with shouting. 

[mfbukowski]

14 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

The use of asterisks for emphasis has a solid history. It emerged in plain-text computer applications (like email) that originally lacked options for bolding or italicising. In some of the applications I use now, like Facebook Messenger, using the asterisks actually makes the word appear bold.

Well stars just always put more amps in everything even an ampersand! As-ta-risk, though I don't want to die-a-critical person or be-coma jerk or a bad per cen-t, even for a short period, quotes-omeone in-caret-ly, or bracket them when they make a false exclamation, point, or question Mark's sanity.

 

Edited July 27, 2022 by mfbukowski

[pogi]

On 7/24/2022 at 8:22 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

My workday in Jakarta...

Is this part of the story true?  If so, I was close.  I was guessing somewhere in Oceania like Melanesia or Micronesia. 

[mfbukowski]

12 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Well stars just always put more amps in everything even an ampersand! As-ta-risk, though I don't want to die-a-critical person or be-coma jerk or a bad per cen-t, even for a short period, quotes-omeone in-caret-ly, or bracket them when they make a false exclamation, point, or question Mark's sanity.

 

Only the worst jokes in the world need to be explained, and this is one!

I wanted to see if I could make semi-intelligible statements using, if possible, only the names of figures used in punctuation.   I drive my wife crazy because I see puns everywhere- it is part of my language ambiguity schtick.   I see two or three ways of understanding virtually any statement.

So here's the translation:

(Asterisks are "stars" and they are used for emphasis and so have more "amps" of power)

Asterisk= "As to risk"

Diacritical= die-a-critical

Coma= be come a

Percent=  person

Period= period in time

Quotes = quotes

Caret = in- caret- ly (incorrectly)

Bracket= bracket - 

Exclamation point = explanation, point

Question mark = question Mark (that's me!)

That's eleven putrid puns about punctuation in less than two lines that sort of actually makes sense!   I am quite proud of myself!

😜

Edited July 27, 2022 by mfbukowski

[bsjkki]

🤦‍♀️

[Calm]

10 hours ago, pogi said:

Is this part of the story true?  If so, I was close.  I was guessing somewhere in Oceania like Melanesia or Micronesia. 

He used to work there, not any more I believe…

[Hamba Tuhan]

22 hours ago, pogi said:

Is this part of the story true?

Yes, I had a one-year work contract in Jakarta. Two years later, I went back to Indonesia as a postgraduate student for a semester at a university in one of the Outer Islands.

In retrospect, it was such a short time, but it has shaped my entire life since. Whilst working in Jakarta (including one month in Sumatra), I was completely on my own for the first time. I thought I understood what it was to rely on the Lord, but then I had literally no one else to turn to, and everything got very serious -- and occasionally even deadly serious.

I returned home after those 12 months with unshakable knowledge borne of intense personal experience.

For example, it was kneeling by myself on the floor of the Pasar Minggu Police Station early one Thursday morning that I was inspired to speak the shortest blessing I have ever given, to a seriously injured young man who had ceased breathing: 'Y---- H------, by the authority of the Mechizedek Priesthood, I seal this anointing and command you to live, in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen'.

As a missionary, I came to love Parley P. Pratt's account of a conversation he had had as a young man with his doubting brother William:

Quote

“Well, then, I am going to fulfil the conditions to the letter on my part. I feel called upon by the Holy Ghost to forsake my house and home for the gospel’s sake; and I will do it, placing both feet firm on these promises with nothing else to rely upon.”

“If I sink, they are false.”

“If I am sustained, they are true. I will put them to the test. Experiment shall now establish the truth of Christ’s promises, or the truth of infidelity.”

“Well,” said he, “try it, if you will; but, for my part, although I always believed the Bible, I would not dare believe it literally, and really stand upon its promises, with no other prop.”

We parted. He to his business, I to my preparations for a mission which should only end with my life.

My love for those words has only grown.

Edited July 28, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[smac97]

As a cautionary tale of the importance of sticking to true stories, consider Beatrice Sparks:

Quote

Beatrice Sparks (January 15, 1917 – May 25, 2012) was a Mormon youth counselor who was known for producing books purporting to be the "real diaries" of troubled teenagers. The books deal with topical issues such as drug abuse, Satanism, teenage pregnancy or AIDS, and are presented as cautionary tales. Although Sparks presented herself as merely the discoverer and editor of the diaries, records at the U.S. Copyright Office show that in fact she is listed as the sole author for all but two of them.

Beatrice Ruby Mathews Sparks was born in Goldburg, Custer County, Idaho, and grew up in Logan, Utah.^[2] She began working with teenagers in 1955, after attending the University of California at Los Angeles and Brigham Young University.^[3] She worked as a music therapist at Utah State Mental Hospital and taught continuing education courses at BYU.

Critics have questioned Sparks's qualifications and experience.^[4] Researchers have been unable to find a record of the Ph.D. she claimed on book jackets and in her résumé.^[3][4] One interviewer wrote that Sparks was "vague about specifics" when asked about her counseling qualifications and professional experience.^[4]

Sparks stated that her experiences working with troubled adolescents made her want to produce cautionary tales that would keep other teens from falling into the same traps. Her first work, Go Ask Alice, was published under the byline "Anonymous" in 1971. In interviews conducted over the next few years, Sparks identified herself as the book's editor and related that Alice consisted partly of the actual diary of a troubled teen, and partly of fictional events based on Sparks's experiences working with other teens.^[4][1] Sparks was unable to produce the original diary for critics.^[5] Later editions of the book contained the standard disclaimer: "This book is a work of fiction. Any references to historical events, real people, or real locales are used fictitiously. Other names, places, characters, and incidents are the product of the author's imagination, and any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental."^[5][1]

In 1973, after the publication of Go Ask Alice, Marcella Barrett, a woman from Pleasant Grove, Utah, approached Sparks to edit the journal of Barrett's deceased son Alden. Alden had suffered from depression and committed suicide at age 16, and Barrett felt that his story might help other at-risk teens. The result was Jay's Journal, which tells the story of a teenage boy drawn into Satanism.^[1] Barrett's family was horrified by the book.^[3] They insisted that Alden never had been involved with the occult and that Sparks had used only 21 entries from his journal (out of 212 supposed entries that appeared in the finished book).^[1][3][5] Sparks defended the book, claiming she got the extra material from letters and interviews with Alden's friends.^[6]

After Jay's Journal, Sparks produced many more "real diaries", including It Happened to Nancy: By an Anonymous Teenager (dealing with AIDS), Almost Lost: The True Story of an Anonymous Teenager's Life on the Streets (gang violence), Annie's Baby: The Diary of Anonymous, A Pregnant Teenager, Treacherous Love: The Diary of an Anonymous Teenager (pupil seduced by teacher), Kim: Empty Inside: The Diary of an Anonymous Teenager (eating disorders) and Finding Katie: The Diary of Anonymous, A Teenager in Foster Care.^[7]

I'm pretty sure Sparks just made most or all of these up.  Her books read like a checklist for social worries of the era (drug addiction, satanism, gang violence, teen pregnancy, etc.).  I would like to think that she did so with a sincere - though substantially misguided and flawed - desire of cautioning youth, as opposed to writing this stuff for self-agrandizement, notoriety, money, etc.  But that's likely just wishful thinking.  Giving too big a benefit of the doubt.

In any event, deliberately trying to pass off a fiction as fact can really create some problems.  See, e.g., here:

Quote

The Gothic Fantasies of Beatrice Sparks
Why a Mormon mom in Utah made up tales of teen drug addiction and death that swept America.
BY REBECCA ONION
AUG 02, 20221:06 PM

Every Halloween, when I see warnings to parents to check their kids’ candy in case someone has slipped edibles into the Sour Patch Kids, I have two thoughts in rapid succession: 1) Who would do that? Gummies are expensive! and 2) Remember Go Ask Alice? The supposed 1971 diary of a white teenage suburbanite who gets slipped LSD in a Coke at a party, then slides into addiction and ruin, contains multiple instances of “spiking”—the iconic first Coke; then, during a time when “Alice” is trying to get clean, the joints her former “grass gang” plants in her purse and locker; and, finally, the acid an ex-friend puts on her chocolate-covered peanuts, which drives “Alice” over the edge into psychosis.

The grim idea that innocent kids may become addicts without ever taking a drug on purpose, victims of a cruel and unforgiving youth culture, has been embedded in American life for decades, and Go Ask Alice was foundational to it. It was also all made up. Rick Emerson’s new book Unmask Alice is a dogged unearthing, and attempted undoing, of all the falsehoods that went into the production of Alice and the other teen journals “edited” by Beatrice Sparks, a housewife and devout Latter-Day Saint from Provo, Utah.

When Alice hit it big, Sparks, an ambitious fifty-something, had tried and failed to get published for years, living off her husband’s earnings in the oil industry while she churned out book proposals, advice columns, and pitches to agents. In one of the many interesting side stories packed into this book, Emerson explains that Go Ask Alice made it to market because of talk-show host Art Linkletter. Linkletter’s daughter Diane, barely 21, died by suicide in 1969, and Linkletter came to think this happened because she had been taking LSD. Sparks, hearing the story, pitched him on her idea of a diary of a lost girl, and it fit his priors. “It was the perfect pitch at the perfect time. It was, after all, a story Art Linkletter already believed,” Emerson writes. Linkletter’s literary agency got the manuscript—which came in the form of a stack of loose sheets and scribbled-over receipts shoved into a paper bag—to Prentice-Hall, where editor Kathryn Fitzgerald took it. Fitzgerald, overhearing a whistling colleague in the hallway, was the one who came up with the idea of pulling the lyric “go ask Alice” from the Jefferson Airplane song “White Rabbit,” and using it as the title. (The diarist goes unnamed throughout the book, adding the mystery.)
...
 

After Alice, Sparks pitched a series of follow-ups, which she hoped would have her name on them, including self-help books and her story of fostering a Navajo teen. They went nowhere. “Everything read like a first draft, with lots of flailing and repetition,” Emerson writes. “Worst of all was Sparks’ tone, which clucked and scolded like an angry bluebird, equal parts cheer and fury.”

What worked was going back to the “found diary” trick. The middle section of Emerson’s book is about Jay’s Journal, a less popular but still respectable-selling follow-up to Alice, which was based on the life of Alden Barrett, the teenage son of another LDS family living in Utah. Alden died just as Alice was taking off. A sensitive and bright teenager who suffered from depression, he had been at constant odds with his family—questioning the doctrines of the LDS Church, stealing pills, briefly running away. After a bad breakup with a girl who loved him but whose parents blocked their relationship, he died by suicide in his parents’ home. He left behind a diary.

Alden’s mother, Marcella Barrett, gave that diary to Beatrice Sparks, against her husband’s wishes, thinking that she could publicize Alden’s life so that other people could see warning signs in their own children. Sparks made it into something totally different: a story of “Jay,” who, over the span of 18 months, drinks and takes pills, then starts using a Ouija board, then moves on to serious Satanism. He has a midnight cemetery wedding ceremony with his girlfriend, where they slash their tongues before kissing, so that their blood mingles together, and then kill a kitten. He’s later possessed by a demon named Raul. Sparks used two dozen entries from Alden’s diary and then added 190, “including all of the violent and occult material,” Emerson notes. The result of this audacious fabrication was, for Alden’s family, catastrophic. They were ostracized in their town, and Alden’s gravestone was desecrated and stolen; the parents divorced, and the rest of the family scattered, leaving their community behind.
...
Most reviews of Unmask Alice focus on Go Ask Alice, which is fair; it’s the most iconic of Sparks’ oeuvre. But Sparks was eventually to publish a shelf full of books of this kind, and I find their massed ranks equally fascinating. Besides Voices, Nancy, and Jay’s Journal, there’s Treacherous Love (about a teen seduced by a teacher); Annie’s Baby (a teen mom); Almost Lost: The True Story of an Anonymous Teenager’s Life on the Streets (a runaway); and more. By the end of her career, Sparks had figured out that she should say, when asked about where she got these tales, that these were stories from her “patients.” But “there were no case studies. There were no patients. There was no clinical practice,” Emerson writes indignantly.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

 

Edited August 2, 2022 by smac97