Joseph Smith

Historians working on the Joseph Smith Papers have to navigate a balancing act between our various audiences—much like those who do contract history work. For the most part, the project has succeeded in its attempts to be balanced. In a review of the first volume of the Journals series in the journal Documentary Editing, Kenneth Minkema, executive editor of the Works of Jonathan Edwards, declared, “Readers need not raise a skeptical eyebrow when they see this edition is produced by LDS members and printed by an LDS press.” He continued, “There is an impartiality and professionalism here in the tone, subjects, and sources that bode well for this series and edition as a reliable resource for all.”[1] Other reviewers agreed. “This book is a significant improvement in [the] historiography of Joseph Smith,” Michael Marquardt, who, at times, has been critical of the church’s history endeavors, stated. “This is a scholarly work but simple enough for a general audience.”[2]

Yet maintaining a neutral tone and not shying away from controversial topics does not always appeal to church members who purchase the product. Continue reading →

Fish ladder constructed by the Army Corps of Engineers at Bonneville Dam, Columbia River (Photo: Eric Guinther, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bonneville_Ladder.jpg)

In my years as a historical consultant, I did several projects for agencies such as the National Park Service and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Much like the church for which I now work, these agencies are interested in their past, but also are sensitive to criticisms that have been levied against them by opposing groups, such as environmental organizations. Producing a history that was acceptable to the agencies’ leadership and also true to the standards of historical scholarship was sometimes a challenge. Continue reading →

Some time ago, I had the opportunity of hearing a presentation by Daniel Walker Howe, a historian who won the 2008 Pulitzer Prize for his book What Hath God Wrought: A History of the United States, 1815-1848. In the course of the seminar, Howe made a plea for academic historians to stop ignoring the general public in their work, declaring that it was time for historians to stop talking only to each other and to engage the larger public. As a trained public historian, I appreciated Howe’s words, recognizing that much of my own work falls within the long-standing historical tradition of attempting to bridge the popular/academic divide. Working first as a historical consultant and now as a documentary editor, I have had many opportunities to engage a broader audience than just academics. Continue reading →