I guess it's time for me to come clean. I've been secretly working on a Book of Mormon archaeology project. That's right, me, the biggest critic of non-John Clark apologists, is working on a BOM archaeology project.
Essentially, what I've done is read through the BOM and flag any and all references to cultural things. I have every mention of political structure, material culture, subsistence, etc marked in a copy of the Book of Mormon. I'd like to publish a concordance with some limited ethnographic commentary. I am currently looking for a publisher, and if anyone bites, I'll turn my list into a book.
As Juan has constantly pointed out, people don't actually know what the BOM says about this stuff. This would let the BOM stand on its own with both critics and apologists, and I think it would be an invaluable reference tool.
I would appreciate some feedback when you're through being stunned. Juan doesn't know about this, and I'd appreciate it if neither he nor Joel find out about it yet. Thanks.
3 comments:
Yes Christina, you would be a whore...but a whore with a book deal and some income on the side so who cares. I'm willing to bet one of the Nancy Pancy Mormon publishers at Desert Book and Tape would eat up a project like this like green jello with carrots in it at a Christmas party in the gym.
But there's a problem for someone like yourself here. I can see this project going one of two ways. 1) Write a book that Mormon culture consumers would love to have on their bookshelves so that they can impress the elders quorm with information from a "Book of Mormon Archaeological Scholar" (which is what your publishing company will paint you as). This is likely to sell the most books and probably make you some descent cash on the side. Whore yes, but with money in hand. I personally have no big problem with this. Yeah it sounds bad, and you might get a bad rap from some, but your giving the masses what they want and who can blame you for that. Or 2) write a scholarly work that actually tries to make real connections from ethnology, archaeology, etc. with Book of Mormon references. This would probably not be nearly as popular or sell as much. I could see it being used by people serious looking for connections.
The problem with this approach is the truth part. If you find things that are real or good connections in Book of Mormon archaeology, ethnology, or culture….than that’s good. Faith based people AND critics can say “well would you look at that, that seems legit.” BUT, I would guess that critics are going to see a number of things that do not connect, as well as a number of things that don’t make sense. Some of these might be real arguments. You, or Juan, or apologists in general are going to have to say, “well, we don’t know right now it’ll be revealed latter…or problems in translation…or Joseph didn’t really mean horses or metal as we know them”…etc. I guess what I’m saying is it really isn’t going to do much for the critics, they are never going to except regardless of quality of the data presented. I think we all probably agree the BOM is to be accepted by faith, BUT real linkages are interesting to check out and understand. Especially for anthropologists. Whichever way you took the project, I would buy a copy and prominently display it on my bookcase at home, either to mock or occasionally read for interesting insights.
You know, the more I think about it, you may be able to pull off something in between. Meaning a book that sells well and is based on good solid work. Your writing, including the scholarly stuff, is very readable. You might be able to bring the good stuff to the masses. In which case you would have full respect, and some pocket change. Nice
Ok. I, too, have my two cents. Chris, I would just like to give you props on not holding this in any longer. It may have been damaging to your conscience, and we are happy you feel comfortable to share with us, the Friends of the Fremont and of BOM literature (when it is written correctly and with good intent). Cent # 1) I think the key is to keep the ethnographic references to a minimum, as you have already stated you intend to do. By doing so, you will keep others from reading too much into your examples of similarities between the archaeology and what was recorded/translated (This is a way to avoid being accused of writing something that follows the classic dichotomy of “testimony based on knowledge vs. faith/divine revelation”). Cent # 2) If you truly stick to the social and political structure and material culture found in the BOM and state it as it is written, it will stand on its own as an incredible reference when studying the BOM. Stay away from too many comparisons to current theory on Mayan/Mesoamerican anthropology, and it may prove to be a great resource used to better understand this canon.
By using social cultural theory, it really could be a great way to approach the study of the BOM. I predict you will easily get this picked up by a publisher, but fight to not have “BYU Anthropology graduate” or “Archaeologically trained” anywhere on the cover or in the marketing. By doing so, you will be putting yourself in the category of every other Mormon Tour guide and C. Allen-like book out there. No offense to our tour-guide friend, but we just don’t buy into that stuff. Props on your diligence in BOM study.
Post a Comment