Rating: 
Summary: The true Joseph Smith at last after 150 years!
Review: After reading many many books on Joseph Smith from pro and anti sources some dating back more than 100 years old, this one is easily the best and most disturbing of all.
It takes everything that is known historically about Smith and uses what modern science knows to put together a very detailed pscho-analysis, if you will, of Joseph Smith. It is a very sad and disturbing portrait. I don't recommend it for the faint of heart. But if you follow the author's thoughtful argument to the end and understand his thesis, you end up with a very powerful and comprehensive portrait of a sad, lonely and manipulative person who was charismatic enough to gather hundreds of followers who loved and adored him. I would only recommend the book to those well versed in the history of the period and of Smith. Should only be read after reading the Hill and Brodie biographies at a minimum. I was reminded of John Mack's great pscyobiography of Lawrence of Arabia(T. E. Lawrence) "Prince of our Disorder" that won the Pulitzer prize in 1976.
I have read the Anderson book twice in it's entirety and parts many times more and am always struck by the power of his portrait. This is one for the ages, in my opinion. Too bad it has taken this long to reveal the Joseph Smith at last! Don't miss this one, it will change your world view on human nature itself.
Rating: 
Summary: Inside the Mind of Taylor Jones
Review: As a scientist/engineer, it seemed strange to me that Doctor Anderson used the pronoun "I" in a technical dissertation. He did this to take responsibility for his thoughts. But "I" seems to be what the book is all about as it probes the mind of Joseph Smith without having the patient on the couch. The difficulties in analyzing a dead man are not overlooked by Doctor Anderson, but he does an outstanding job of probing the corpse. Some assumptions seem far fetched, but my associations with psychologists in an industrial setting have shown me that their analytical skills in evaluating personalities are powerful. After reading the book, I had to look for the identities of the characters in my Taylor Jones detective and western novels. After all, being raised a Mormon, I know more about the history of Joseph Smith than any other fictional character. I can relate to Joseph Smith's poverty and his actions. In my western saga BULL, is Roy "Bull" Davis in reality Joseph Smith as he builds his western empire by hook or by crook as he tries to overcome his poverty and the childhood experience of having his parents killed by Comanches who butchered his pregnant mother? Is my own sarcasm reflected when Bull, after giving money to a teamster to give to a powder who has had his leg crushed in the temple quarry in Little Cottonwood Canyon (actually my grandfather who spend two years healing in Porterville and ended up with one leg two inches shorter than the other), is asked by the teamster, "Are you one of the three Nephites?" Bull, not understanding the remark, rides on through the valley as he seeks the villain, Corn Smith, who murdered is beloved Happy's third husband (Bull is her fourth husband. Legal polyandry?) Again, Walks-Like-Snake, the Ute chief antagonist in Bull, while selling pine nuts and looking at the Temple spires on Main Street in Salt Lake City, tells his wife that the Mormons are confused about and change their minds about the number of their gods. Is deputy Peter Ott in Revenge on the Mogollon Rim confused about his role with women and secretively dishonest and cruel because he is a prototype of Joseph Smith? What about detective Richard Lacey in Bone China and in In No Way Guilty? Why do his cases become increasingly grandiose as he tangles with Nazis in Bone China and with two mafia families in In No Way Guilty? If Doctor Anderson read my western novels, would he find me in the saddle? Oh, I know he would, but perhaps Joseph Smith too. John Taylor Jones, Ph.D. (TAYLOR JONES)
Rating: 
Summary: What A Professional Historian Says
Review: From John Lukacs (If you don't know who he is you shouldn't be reading "history") in "The Hilter [or anyone else] Of History, pp.24,25: |"This was the fad (I am loath to give it another name)of psychohistory, meaning not merely the application of psychology to historical figures ... but of psychoanalytic 'technique,' predominantly Freudian, to their subject. This is not the place to argue against, or even to sum up, the essential and, yes, shortsighted faults of Freudianism, save to say that if their application to the diagnosis and the therapy of living human beings is often questionable, this must be even more so when it comes to the application of psychoanalysis to the dead."
Rating:
Summary: What A Professional Historian Says
Review: From John Lukacs (If you don't know who he is you shouldn't be reading "history") in "The Hilter [or anyone else] Of History, pp.24,25: |"This was the fad (I am loath to give it another name)of psychohistory, meaning not merely the application of psychology to historical figures ... but of psychoanalytic 'technique,' predominantly Freudian, to their subject. This is not the place to argue against, or even to sum up, the essential and, yes, shortsighted faults of Freudianism, save to say that if their application to the diagnosis and the therapy of living human beings is often questionable, this must be even more so when it comes to the application of psychoanalysis to the dead."
Rating:
Summary: Come on
Review: I haven't read the book, but I'm giving it 5 stars because of the poor reviews made by people who are obvious LDS members. I've found that LDS church members often write bad reviews for an outsider's opinion of their religion, the prophets of their religion, the practices in their religion, etc. They don't quite get the idea that other opinions do exist and that most of the world does not regard the LDS faith as the one true church. Please don't rate a book poorly because it was an attempt of psychoanalysis of your first prophet. You don't have to agree with the book, nor the subject matter. But rather than write poor reviews, just stay away from the book. Don't try to sway other people from literature because you don't like it.
Rating:
Summary: Inside...J.S." may be wrong, but not cuz Spaulding wrote it.
Review: I look up reviews for Solomon Spaulding's "Manuscript Found" and found one which follows. People who have not read the book should not write reviews, and I am breaking that rule. However, I doubt the reviewer that attributed authorship of the BOM to Spaulding did, either. In this case, I'm hoping two wrongs will make a right and my five stars negate her one. If it is a one-star, it isn't because the author chose the wrong subject. Manuscript Found, November 21, 2002
Reviewer: Kathy Quito David from South Brunswick, New Jersey, USA This book was interesting because of the older novelist style of writing, which it is a very good example of. However, the novel is not finished, which is very disappointing. The story wanders from the beginning, in which a ship from early Rome is blown off course across the Atlantic ocean to North America about the first century A.D., to a description of two Ppre-Columbian Native American populations who exist in peace until a forbidden love causes a war. The story never returns to the plight of the Roman castaways (which is disappointing, as it starts out in a very interesting way), and continues to digress at many points throughout the story. One of the major interests about this book is the premise that Joseph Smith, who founded the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, commonly called the Mormon Church, used Mr. Spauldings book as the basis for the Book of Mormon. After reading the unfinished novel, it becomes plain that the Book of Mormon and Manuscript Found have little in common other than the setting of North America and the fact that pre-Columbian American peoples are both featured in both books. The Mormons were responsible for publishing Manuscript Found (which was never published by the author for want of any publisher's interest in it), in an effort to show that the novel could not have been used by Joseph Smith as a source for the Book of Mormon (which Mormons believe is an additional book of sacred scripture and a testament of Jesus Christ when he appeared to pre-Columbian Native Americans shortly after his crucifixtion and ascension to heaven). Many critics of the Mormons have stated that Mr. Spauldings Manuscript Found was Joseph Smith's inspiration for the Book of Mormon. However, after reading the book objectively, and comparing it to the Book of Mormon, I found almost no similarity at all, other than the setting of Pre-Columbian North America. Still, Manuscript Found is an interesting work. The edition published by the Mormons shows photocopies of Mr. Spaulding's original manuscript at the beginning of each chapter and also prints the parts he crossed out so that the entire manuscript may be seen in the published form, including the author's editing marks. It is worthwhile to read it.
Rating:
Summary: Inside...J.S." may be wrong, but not cuz Spaulding wrote it.
Review: I look up reviews for Solomon Spaulding's "Manuscript Found" and found one which follows. People who have not read the book should not write reviews, and I am breaking that rule. However, I doubt the reviewer that attributed authorship of the BOM to Spaulding did, either. In this case, I'm hoping two wrongs will make a right and my five stars negate her one. If it is a one-star, it isn't because the author chose the wrong subject. Manuscript Found, November 21, 2002
Reviewer: Kathy Quito David from South Brunswick, New Jersey, USA This book was interesting because of the older novelist style of writing, which it is a very good example of. However, the novel is not finished, which is very disappointing. The story wanders from the beginning, in which a ship from early Rome is blown off course across the Atlantic ocean to North America about the first century A.D., to a description of two Ppre-Columbian Native American populations who exist in peace until a forbidden love causes a war. The story never returns to the plight of the Roman castaways (which is disappointing, as it starts out in a very interesting way), and continues to digress at many points throughout the story. One of the major interests about this book is the premise that Joseph Smith, who founded the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, commonly called the Mormon Church, used Mr. Spauldings book as the basis for the Book of Mormon. After reading the unfinished novel, it becomes plain that the Book of Mormon and Manuscript Found have little in common other than the setting of North America and the fact that pre-Columbian American peoples are both featured in both books. The Mormons were responsible for publishing Manuscript Found (which was never published by the author for want of any publisher's interest in it), in an effort to show that the novel could not have been used by Joseph Smith as a source for the Book of Mormon (which Mormons believe is an additional book of sacred scripture and a testament of Jesus Christ when he appeared to pre-Columbian Native Americans shortly after his crucifixtion and ascension to heaven). Many critics of the Mormons have stated that Mr. Spauldings Manuscript Found was Joseph Smith's inspiration for the Book of Mormon. However, after reading the book objectively, and comparing it to the Book of Mormon, I found almost no similarity at all, other than the setting of Pre-Columbian North America. Still, Manuscript Found is an interesting work. The edition published by the Mormons shows photocopies of Mr. Spaulding's original manuscript at the beginning of each chapter and also prints the parts he crossed out so that the entire manuscript may be seen in the published form, including the author's editing marks. It is worthwhile to read it.
Rating:
Summary: Technical, Complete, Somewhat Extended Analysis
Review: I wish I could give it four and a half stars. Dr. Anderson takes a fine point to the early life of Joseph Smith. With impeccable care and documentation, he leads us through the childhood of a man who would exhibit a type of genius rarely seen in charismatic leaders. Anderson wisely limits himself to the effects of Joseph's experiences in the composition and contents of the Book of Mormon. By the time the "semi-retired psychiatrist" gets to the end of the book, he barely needs to justify or explain his diagnosis since he's already done so from a variety of angles previously. My only criticism is that occasionally Dr. Anderson extends his theories and suppositions quite far, but he usually does so with qualifications. Not for the initiate into the arcane world of LDS theology and history. Try "Mormon America" first. But for a guy like me who spent 40 years (two as a missionary) in "the Church," it's a haunting trip into the mind of a very famous, unique American religious leader.
Rating:
Summary: Why
Review: Imagine that your satan himself... now if there was one church that was truly God's own church, would you or would you not do what you could to place hatred in the hearts of any man you could so that they woulld try to discreadit it? Would'nt you want to do what you could to keep as many as possable away from it? And how would you go about doing that? Would you try literture and media? Just a few questions to ponder.
Rating: 
Summary: Put it in context
Review: The context in which this book must be read is given in the first chapter. The author says, and I paraphrase, "This book doesn't ask the question, 'Did Joseph Smith write the Book of Mormon?' This book assumes that he did, and addresses the question, 'How did Joseph Smith write the Book of Mormon?'"
In short, don't look for a fair approach to the first question. That's not what this book is about. Anderson has a great handle on Mormon history. The insights that he offers into how certain traumatic events in Joseph Smith's childhood could have affected his personality are often enlightening, and always interesting. i.e. The trauma associated with the near amputation of Smiths leg, and the public humiliation of being on trial for being a glass looker. Anderson does a nice job of helping us reflect on Smith's humanity. He helps us see that these events are indeed difficult for a person to go through, and that they can shape how one views the world. That said, I thought this book also had some fundamental problems. For example, at times Anderson uses the Book of Mormon text to help determine the order or details of certain historical events in Joseph's life. Other times he seems to claim to know exactly what motivated Smith on certain occasions, because of what is written in a part of the Book of Mormon. This seemed too speculative to me. Some of this speculation is interesting theory, other portions seem specious. Nevertheless, an interesting read. A intriguing theoretical approach.
|
