Comments on: Patty Limerick on Mormonism in the West

By: David Grua

David Grua — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:48:59 +0000

Joel: I have to agree with you on the lack of substance in her writings. She for the most part relies on secondary sources and a compelling writing style to sell her arguments. Richard White and William Cronon, on the other hand, are able to dig into the sources and present their arguments compellingly. But I think that Limerick is still very important in terms of providing frameworks for the study of the West. The 4 Cs of Conquest, Convergence, Continuity, and Complexity do weave their way through her text, although she wouldn’t flesh them out as concepts until a few years later.

As for the Hoffman stuff, she did write her book in 1987, when Hoffman was still recent memory. I have to wonder if she were to write the book today if she would see it as that compelling of an example to make her point about the presence of the past.

By: Joel

Joel — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:05:07 +0000

I’ve never been a huge fan of “Legacy of Conquest.” Although I think that Limerick’s framework describing the West as a zone of convergence and conflict between racial and social groups is quite useful, her analysis always seemed to me to be a bit more style than substance–I still cannot follow her argument all the way through the text. Also, her willingness to jump on the Mark Hoffman bandwagon always made me feel that she didn’t really “get” Mormons.

By: Margaret Young

Margaret Young — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 02:07:47 +0000

Steve Evans, you make me proud to be a BYU English professor, knowing that you are an alumnus.

By: By Common Consent » There once was a sister missionary from Nantucket

By Common Consent » There once was a sister missionary from Nantucket — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:42:15 +0000

[...] A post over at the Juvenile Instructor is causing me to reflect on that most juvenile of poetic forms: the limerick. This has led me to write a couple of very bad limericks (inspired by our intrepid leader). They are both very bad. Keep that in mind. [...]

By: David Grua

David Grua — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:38:54 +0000

Um, ok. Thanks for supplying the missing analysis.

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:36:29 +0000

David, read the title of your post, man!

By: David Grua

David Grua — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:35:41 +0000

Steve, you know we always like it when you stop by, but can I ask, what does that have to do with the post?

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:24:04 +0000

I find this post lacking, for obvious reasons. I hereby supply the missing analysis:

There was once a prophet named Mormon,
With gold plates (tho he was a poor man),
When his people were slain,
He wept not in vain,
Cuz he followed the plan God was formin’.

By: David Grua

David Grua — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 20:53:02 +0000

Good question, Chris. Richard White, in "It's Your Misfortune and None of My Own", perhaps the best single-volume history of the American West, also devotes considerable space to the Saints. Like Limerick, he doesn't necessarily look at the Mormons through the lens of religion, but rather as a social group.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 20:49:40 +0000

David, I agree with your assessment that the significance of Limerick’s work is not necessarily in the content of her treatment of Mormons (though it is certainly important), but rather the space she grants to the subject in situating the place Mormons in the West. Have other historians followed suit, or do they continue to relegate Mormons to the doughnut hole?