Tragedy at Mountain Meadows to be released


Elphaba
 Share

Recommended Posts

No, I admit I didn't. In fact, I found his research to be thorough, and still believe it provided insights and perspective that enhanced Brooks' research.[...]

I agree. I guess my post wasn't clear. His research was so thorough that I was left to wonder how he drew some of the conclusions he did from his research. It isn't the research, or evidence, it is the interpretation of some of it. It is an excellent resource as long as one focuses on the evidence and not the conclusions he draws (in my humble, uneducated, measly opinion, of course).

I will hit up my copy over the weekend. I'm pretty sure I've got some notes in there. There wasn't a lot (maybe 4-5 things) that stood out to me as "How on earth did you draw that conclusion from the evidence you just provided?"

Hugs,

Stu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree with Dr. T. The book describes, sometimes in numbing detail, all the events but also launches in some wild speculations based on some very thin "evidence" if you ask me.

It is a good blow by blow and historical account. I think where it fails is in painting a clear image of the state of mind and the psychology of wart and siege afflicting the saints at the time. In my own personal experience, most human beings can be driven to commit unthinkable acts of violence if the environmental factors are "right". There is significant evidence that group think and collective reasoning become quite dangerous under duress, extreme psychological conditions and perceived threat. What happened at Mountain Meadows can not be justified under any circumstances, but it can certainly be explained in accurate historical context. The book did not dig deep enough in that respect, I thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isalnder:

I tend to agree with Dr. T. The book describes, sometimes in numbing detail, all the events but also launches in some wild speculations based on some very thin "evidence" if you ask me.

Are you really talking about Doctor Steuss' comments on Bagley's MMM book?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree with Dr. T. The book describes, sometimes in numbing detail, all the events but also launches in some wild speculations based on some very thin "evidence" if you ask me.

If you're referring to Doctor Steuss, I am not sure that's what he meant. I'm sure he'll clarify.

In my opinion, a book about the massacre has to be “mind-numbing” or it fails to provide the complex and diverse details that came together to create what I call “the perfect storm.” If they hadn’t, the massacre would have likely not occurred.

I actually think Bagley’s book is more of an addendum to Brooks’ work, extrapolating information that needed further explanation, especially details Brooks’ was not privy to. I do not look at Bagley’s book as the final explanation of the massacre, as it is not nearly as “mind numbing,” as a true treatment must be.

The massacre was not simply a matter of a few men getting together and saying “Let’s go hunting today.” As you even noted, there was much more that explains the truth. And it is mind-numbing how all of these horrific incidents came together.

My point is, if the new book isn't "mind-numbing," I will probably not take it that seriously. But to call Bagley's treatment "mind-numbing" is ridiculous.

In fact, it wasn't long enough to numb! :P

Elphaba

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

In fact, it wasn't long enough to numb! :P

Elphaba

Speak for you own mind. Mine gets wacky on a whiff of vanilla extract or the possibility that the extended version of Dune may be shown again sometime on the Sci-Fi Channel. :D

BTW, I loved reading Bagley's history articles when he wrote for the Salt Lake Tribune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share