Customer Reviews

Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide

5 star:		(20)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

In one corner Skeptical-Critic shuffles his feet as he knocks his gloves together. In the other corner Believer- Apologist ghosts jabs, bobbing up and down. At the back of the arena Indifferent-Non-believer and Didactic-Believer glance in the direction of the main event, feeling a little out of place. Standing at center ring is the Book of Mormon, America's most unique and prolific scriptural production. In the middle of this epic bout Grant Hardy calls a timeout with his new book Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide. He attempts the double-task of convincing non-Mormons that the Book of Mormon is worth the effort of serious analysis while convincing Mormons that searching their sacred book can yield more than didactic homilies or proofs of ancient authenticity. Granting the importance of the main event, he offers a different venue altogether.

By reading closely, Hardy guides readers through novel readings not found in other studies of the Book of Mormon. For instance, he observes that "Alma or Mormon (or Joseph Smith) has structured the first two-thirds of the book of Alma according to a series of parallels" (304). Alma 4-16 includes three sermons delivered to three different cities. Alma 36-42 includes Alma's three charges to three different sons (Alma 36-42). The sermons and charges overlap in theme, respective length, order, and source (primary documents are utilized in each case). This city/son parallel is even more interesting considering Alma preached in five cities but only three accounts are included in the narrative. Altogether, this indicates remarkable coincidence or deliberate construction: Zarahemla/Helaman (morally ambiguous), Gideon/Shiblon (clearly righteous, shortest), Ammonihah/Corianton (clearly wicked, longest).

Impressively, Hardy's book is so full of detailed analysis that this particular discovery in Alma is actually relegated to a footnote! At times Hardy moves quickly through bits of the Book of Mormon. His tracing of its complexity may lose outsiders who aren't as familiar with Lehi's vision of the tree, or the Nephite monetary system, or other (relatively incidental) details. Similarly, some Latter-day Saints may feel slightly disoriented with occasional technical jargon. These difficulties are explained by Hardy's desire to reach a broad audience. The book invites critics to attempt a "willing suspension of disbelief" so they might see more fruitful readings despite doubts of authorship. Latter-day Saints, he adds, may need a "willing suspension of belief, that is, to think of the Book of Mormon as a work of literature, with an emphasis on its creativity and artifice" as opposed to proofs of ancient origin or teachings for our times (28).

This book makes a strong case that when examined closely, the Book of Mormon "exhibits a literary exuberance that frustrates quick judgments and reductive analysis" (267). By shifting "attention away from Joseph Smith and back to the Book of Mormon itself, a common discourse becomes possible" through literary analysis (xvi). Readers who try to play by Hardy's rules will be richly rewarded. It will change the way you read the Book of Mormon forever. A Reader's Guide is a knockout punch in ink and paper; I can't recommend it enough.

[...]

The premise of the book is that relatively few readers of the Book of Mormon, whether Mormons or non-Mormons, study the book to understand it as a composition in its own right. People mostly give it a quick read to confirm their belief\disblief in the LDS or Mormon Church's claim to be divinely organized and run. The author feels that in reading the Book of Mormon that way, much of the meaning and almost all of the nuances of the book are missed completely. His effort treats the Book of Mormon as susceptible to the same analysis as is used on works of historical fiction.

He makes the point a number of times, that it makes no difference to understanding Mormon's motivations, as to whether he was a literary creation of Joseph Smith or a true historical figure. This will, no doubt, irritate both some believers and some non-believers, who want to proceed quickly to a conclusion about the origin of the Book of Mormon and therefore the validity of the LDS Church as a divinely organized church.

As the key to understanding the Book of Mormon, this book discusses the three main narrators: Nephi, Mormon and Moroni, beginning with their different narrative styles and aims. Many examples are given to support the book's assertion that the narrators' lives influenced their style and aims. Nephi, for example, wrote his portion later in his life, after he knew that his lineage would fail and die out. His writings were intended to inspire the descendants of his unrighteous brothers. Mormon, on the other hand, was the historian, who, in addition to the careful recording of important names, places and events, selected a number of comparisons of good followers with inspired followers. His point was to underscore the importance of divine inspiration. Again, whether the Book of Mormon is fiction or history, is irrelevant to the discussion. The point is: how well do the stories hang together? Do they achieve the writer's intent?

I especially enjoyed the non-dogmatic approach taken on this subject, and would recommend this book to anyone who wants to take a more in-depth look at the Book of Mormon. There are some points the author raises that will be a little uncomfortable for the reader, whether Mormon or non-Mormon. Ultimately, however, the author leaves it to you to make your own conlusions, but with a better appreciation of the Book of Mormon than you started with.

In Understanding the Book of Mormon, Grant Hardy gives us a fine example of deep and creative reading. Even those who are familiar with the Book of Mormon--indeed, even believers who regard it as scripture--will find this guided tour well worth the effort. This is not a doctrinal commentary in any sense. Rather, Hardy's aim is to demonstrate, through a careful, close reading, how the BoM was put together. He focuses on the book's three narrators (Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni). One of Hardy's major points is that this way of looking at the book yields insights regardless of whether you regard the BoM as ancient scripture or as the product of Joseph Smith's imagination. Either way, it has an internal logic that can be examined in its own right. I take him at his word when he maintains that it is not his intention to enter into the history vs. fraud debate or to either buttress or undermine faith in the scriptural claims made by the book and the LDS Church. He is a serious reader taking a very serious look at a book that asks us to take it seriously. Other serious-minded readers would do well to give him the benefit of the doubt and suspend judgment until the case has been made. There is no shortage of insights, occasionally doctrinal or historical but most often literary. There are also a few places where Hardy leaves you wanting more, or where he stops short of a fully satisfying explanation. But quibbles and questions aside, this is an excellent, serious examination of the BoM. This book, along with Hardy's earlier "Reader's Edition" of the BoM (2003), makes Grant Hardy a major and refreshing voice in BoM studies.

I just finished Grant Hardy's Understanding the Book of Mormon. I have vaguely the same impression that I had when I read Rough Stone Rolling. I find both books to be very well written, both to be tremendously insightful and "brilliant" enough to be straight-forward in their presentation. Both books gave me exciting "ah ha" moments of learning and insights. Both books seem to be by very, very knowledgeable scholars who ask the most difficult questions, do not shy away from difficult issues, and who find some excellent and "open" conclusions. Finally, both books allowed me to see their respective subjects in an exhilarating new light.

Hardy's treatment of Nephi was, to use a word he uses, moving. Hardy shows how the very "surety" of Nephi's voice could mask and reveal some substantial doubts and fears. Those fears make Nephi seem much more real to me. And Hardy's treatment of Mormon is also tremendously insightful. While the section on Moroni is also very compelling, I found myself getting caught up in the New Testament anachronisms Hardy points out. It seems to me that Hardy does not resolve those anachronisms in a convincing way, and that was unexpected for me, given how well he addresses other possible concerns. The only other "problem" clearly left unresolved is are the First and Second Isaiah issues. I respect Hardy for acknowledging them and I respect him for sticking to the purpose of his book--an examination of the voices of the book's three different "authors." Hardy achieves his purpose brilliantly--showing the rich literary complexity of the Book of Mormon. And, in the best of all possible ways, I will never read that book the same again.

I loved this book! Grant Hardy steps away from the ways of reading generally adopted by non-Mormon scholars (trying to show what it tells us about Joseph Smith), Mormon scholars (trying to prove its truth through identification of literary techniques unique to Hebrew literature), or lay Mormon readers (seeking verse by verse for inspiration) and instead suggests "that the Book of Mormon can be read as literature - a genre that encompasses history, fiction, and scripture - by anyone trying to understand this odd but fascinating book." In doing so, he examines the book as the work of three principal narrators - Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni - each very distinctive in circumstances, style, and sense of audience.

What I loved about this book:

1. Hardy analyzes not only what IS there but what ISN'T there but perhaps should be. For one example, Nephi recounts his father Lehi's blessings to each of his children, except his blessing to Nephi! Why might that have been excluded? Admitted speculation - albeit textually suggested - ensues. For another, Hardy points out that with one major exception, the Jaredite record (Book of Ether) seems to be almost entirely non-Christian.

2. Hardy is a believer - as of a fabulous interview I heard in April 2011 on the Mormon Stories podcast he was serving in a Stake Presidency - but does not shy away from the difficult elements of the Book of Mormon. How does Nephi quote from elements of Isaiah that the best Biblical scholarship suggests were written long after Nephi et al left Jerusalem? What about the passages that rely heavily on New Testament prose? Hardy explores potential explanations, and which are more likely to be faith-based rather than evidence-based. As Hardy says, "As believers, we should read it as carefully as possible, and we should bring to our study the best biblical and historical scholarship available, but there is enough theological flexibility to accommodate whatever we might find" [1].

3. In his analysis of the Book of Mormon as literature, he draws on other scripture traditions, from Zen classics to Tibetan tests to Hindu sacred poetry. He also draws on literature, from Gulliver's Travels to Nabokov's Pale Fire to Don Quixote.

4. The footnotes are fabulous: They provide all the additional information and source material that you could want.

I hope to come back to this text again and again, and - more importantly - use it launch my own much more careful reading of the Book of Mormon and other sacred texts.

If you don't want to trust me, here are a few other reviews worth reading:

* Steven Walker, BYU Studies, 50(3), 2011
* Julie Smith, Times & Seasons Blog, 15 August 2011 (adapted from her Dialogue review)
* 12 Questions with Grant Hardy at the Times & Seasons Blog, 7 September 2011 (part 1 & part 2)
* For a non-Mormon perspective, see Alan Wolfe, "Chloroform in Print: Does the Book of Mormon Get a Bad Rap?" Slate, 17 May 2010

[1] 12 Questions with Grant Hardy, Part 2, Times & Seasons Blog, 7 September 2011.

This was a fantastic book. It is a literary analysis of the Book of Mormon text, with a particular focus on its narrative structure and the personalities and motivations of its three primary authors/characters: Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni (whether they are "authors" or "characters" in a book depends on your point of view). Dr. Hardy is a member of the church, but he tries very hard to take an objective look at the text of the Book of Mormon itself, without expressly passing judgment as to whether the Book of Mormon is actually what it purports to be. Although his bias does shine through occasionally (something that I personally had no problem with), he does an amazing job of picking up on subtle hints and clues contained withing the text of the Book of Mormon to not only reveal what Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni were like, but to also tell us about Alma the Younger, his son Helaman, Nephi's brother Jacob, Captain Moroni, and many others. Dr. Hardy even gives us 6 full pages of analysis of Zeniff, who is definitely not one of the Book of Mormon's main players.

We are shown the likely identity of the sins that Nephi bemoans in 2 Nephi 4, which apparently included pride and a lack of patience with his brothers. Alma the Younger's literary genius and ability with Hebrew poetry is revealed. Mormon's editorial technique and his strategy in abridging the Nephite record is revealed in example, after consistent example. Moroni's insecurity about his writing is reflected in the way he relies so heavily on quotations from others (primarily from his father Mormon and from Nephi). The distinction between the views of Mormon and Moroni regarding the role of historical evidence in building faith is made clear with Dr. Hardy's analysis.

There were a few things in the book I didn't agree with. For example, Dr. Hardy thinks Nephi asked the "wrong question" in his multi-chapter vision in 1 Nephi when the Spirit of the Lord asked him what he desired and Nephi answered by requesting an interpretation of the tree of life Lehi had seen in a vision. Hardy argues that, because the Spirit of the Lord immediately leaves Nephi after Nephi makes that request and an angel comes to walk Nephi through the remainder of his vision, Nephi must have done something wrong. I disagree. I think that, prior to his birth, Christ did not announce his own coming. That was the job of angels, and that is why the Spirit of the Lord departed and an angel came to teach Nephi about Christ's "condescension," which was necessary to answer Nephi's request for an explanation of the love of God.

There were also a few things that I wish Dr. Hardy would have spent more time on. For example, I would have liked more analysis of the evidence for "Second Isaiah" and why we should question its appearance in the Book of Mormon. In all, however, the book was very, very good.

At the end, Dr. Hardy says that the book was the result of his first pass through the Book of Mormon using his method of literary analysis, and he hints that much more could be done. Well, I want more. I hope that he is working to do another volume.

Most Mormons accept the Book of Mormon at face value. Most critics and non-Mormons reject it out of hand. Hardy writes that the Book of Mormon is the one book that critics can reject without actually reading it. Hardy gives the Book of Mormon a detailed contextual analysis of the book from the perspective of its three narrators: Nephi, Mormon, and Moroni. The differences among the narratives is distinct and very important. He also analyzes the text itself and finds passages of poetic beauty.

There are only two meaningful arguments for the origin of the Book of Mormon. The first is that it was written by Joseph Smith, an 1820 American frontiersman with perhaps a 4th grade education at the time he "wrote" the Book of Mormon in about 20 weeks with the help of several persons as scribes. The original foolscap was delivered directly to the printer who set the type and printed it. Given Smith's age, education, location, era, and the extremely short time to produce the book, the "genius" hypothesis seems very problematic to me. I doubt that any American scholar could have produced such a work in 1830 in 20 weeks out of whole cloth. Hardy's analysis create even more doubt that the conventional origin hypothesis is plausible.

The only alternative to the "genius" hypothesis is the miraculous origin story accepted by the Mormons. Other explanations including plagiarizing Spaulding's manuscript or Ethan Smith' "View of the Hebrews" have been discredited by historians.

Hardy points out that the book is extremely complex, subtle, and deep and recommends that it be read at face value. Mormons will be very comfortable with Hardy's academic approach to this controversial book. Non-Mormon scholars will find a very careful analysis of a book they might not be inclined to believe to be authentic, but which is a non-trivial work that deserves careful reading.

I highly recommend Hardy's book, as well as his "Readers Version" of the Book of Mormon, which is nothing less than the Book of Mormon reformatted to read like the narrative it is.

I love this book! Grant Hardy has lifted the BOM characters off the page and presents them as real, three-dimensional people with thoughts and intentions, cares and concerns. I have read the BOM several times, but I am seeing it now in new ways. I highly recommend this book for Mormon and Non-Mormons to get a better grasp on a valuable text.

After reading these reviews and a long string of comments, I wanted to have a say. Tonight I was talking with one of my heroines, a woman I admire enormously, who is well-read, a literature teacher at the high school and college level. I asked her for a favor, to share with me the names of the authors or books she has read that have had a profound effect on her life. I didn't want to miss anything marvelous "out there". She was thoughtful and hesitant to rattle anything off, yet told me the book she was reading currently was a great joy to her: this one, "Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide." She said she couldn't be more pleased. That is why I came to look it up on Amazon and read the reviews.

As food4thought took some side jabs at The Book of Mormon, I wanted to respond to a few points.

Food4thought was clearly incorrect when writing (regarding the Book of Mormon) "nor is it filled with much wisdom." This comment is so opposite to fact, it threw the rest of what was written in the review into serious doubt. I am sure if I took a highlighter to the pages of the Book of Mormon to identify what I found of wisdom, etc., nearly every page would have color. Food4thought, and everyone, come to think of it, would do well to engage in this exercise with the Book of Mormon.

Once I drew little smiley faces for each time I noticed one of Jane Austen's humorous touches in "Pride and Prejudice." There were so many it soon became clear there were so many, it would be a more time consuming activity than I cared to take through from beginning to end. The process of discovery was aided by my pencil. I think I paid better attention because of the exercise.

It appeared to me food4thought missed the sermon in 3rd Nephi in the Book of Mormon, Because of that, I would guess he/she stuck a toe into The Book of Mormon and maybe the same for "Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide." Maybe the reviewer skimmed, jumped around, reading bits and pieces.

As to food4thought writing that the Book of Mormon was "not pleasant to read," that is a personal opinion and gets to vary from person to person, obviously. I read all of the King James version of the Holy Bible and found it "hard" to read first time through, but wonderfully spiritual, profoundly thought-provoking, offering treasures throughout and believably the greatest wisdom and poetry ever written. Yet, along the way there were horrific scenes (golden calf in Exodus) and some dreary repetition, in Chapter 7 of Numbers, as examples. So, parts were not "pleasant" to read in the Bible.

I would like the Bible to be top priority reading for everyone on the planet, including in our schools and colleges and throughout the world's academia. I found reading the Book of Mormon to be similar in every way to my experience with the Bible, but much easier going than the Old Testament. It was even more enjoyable than the New Testament. No offense to anyone intended. They were each wonderful and enjoyable. Suitable superlatives escape me. The words I know are too weak for describing these three volumes.

Maybe, while reading the Book of Mormon, food4thought was in a particularly stubborn, foul mood, or perhaps, sleepy. Sometimes people read when they are hungry, overfed, dehydrated, on a sugar high, restless, upset about something in the world . . . and that all gets in the way.

Even if a person is "fed and watered" I think it is normal to struggle at the beginning when reading something profound until the mind/spirit makes a shift. I have to make a mental effort to get my brain willing to focus so I can comprehend Milton's poetry, as an example.

Food4thought may like knowing I read many of Shakespeare's plays, Goethe's "Sorrows of Young Werther" and "Faust", Melville's "Moby Dick" and Steinbeck's "Grapes of Wrath", "Of Mice and Men", and "The Pearl". Shakespeare was harder to read than the Book of Mormon. The others were easier.

Reading Shakespeare and the other authors food4thought recommended, was educational and interesting and each of the books I read had some value, but not an impressive amount when compared to what I found in the Book of Mormon. Reading it was transforming, really incredible, and the more I paused and thought about what I read, the more profound the experience became. It got to where I wanted a notebook next to me, to capture the spiritual tutoring taking place. And the same thing happens when I read the Bible in a receptive frame of mind. The other books I read from the college lists of recommended/required books fell short and have larger gaps between their insights/profound moments.

So, I am very sorry food4thought had an "unpleasant" experience and I hope will experience joy through reading the Book of Mormon at a future time. I also hope other readers won't miss the abundant "waters of life" wisdom within the pages of the Book of Mormon because of food4thought's two star review.

The strength of this book is that it models the most promising new approach to the Book of Mormon: the literary approach. To be sure, Nibleyesque historical analyses have proven value, but Hardy's literary approach has more value, both because it goes more directly to the meaning of the text (rather than addressing the ancillary issue of the book's historicity) and because the interrelated literary meanings of the Book of Mormon are wonderfully rich and yet mostly unexplored in commentaries. Other scholars should follow Hardy's example. The Book of Mormon deeply rewards this kind of literary reading.