Rating: 
Summary: The weakest book ever written about Mountain Meadows
Review: A case can be made for almost any opinion about Mountain Meadows. This book makes none of them. Mountain Meadows was a context tragedy. An army was headed for Utah, the commander of which had sworn to 'try and hang Brigham Young for treason'. The entire Mormon community was in an uproar. They'd been driven until there was nowhere to run. The Fancher train was in the wrong place at the right time. I'm not a Mormon and I don't condone what happened at Mountain Meadows, but the tragedy was a human one with all the flaws and weaknesses we humans indulge. A cornered, harassed people can be expected to react in unexpected ways. In 1857, at Mountain Meadows Mormons responded as humans often do after they've been treated as less than human by their fellow men, beaten, property confiscated, homes burned, murdered. I love to see new books about Mountain Meadows. The event is one worthy of study by all of us. This book, however, isn't worthy of the author and it isn't worthy of the time a reader will spend reading it. It wouldn't be worthy if it didn't cost a cent.
Rating: 
Summary: Why Isn't This Book Talked About?
Review: After finishing Jon Krakauer's amazing "Under the Banner of Heaven," I turned to Denton's book for a fuller account of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. I wasn't disappointed. This book is absolutely incredible. Anyone who reads it will be shaken up by the history of the Mormon Church and what it has santized. How many Mormons today know of Brigham Young's atrocities? If they knew, would they still worship this faith based in the bloodshed of innocent Americans? Mormonism isn't very old. There is very recent history of torture and cruelty by the Mormon people. This history isn't biblical; it's pre-Civil war. Pretty hard to believe anyone could not acknowledge the abomination that was Brigham Young. But back to the book: Ms. Denton is an amazing writer--perhaps among our best today. Her attention to detail, her chronicling of history is beyond praiseworthy. She merits more distinction than she is getting, considering that this book is never talked about. But then again, the media seems to have swept Krakauer's book under the rug, as well. What are the presses afraid of? Whatever the reasons, anyone wanting to educate him or herself about Mormon history--or anyone ignorant to its roots--should read this book as a companion to Krakauer's. And all should cry at the fate of the doomed Fancher party.
Rating:
Summary: Why Isn't This Book Talked About?
Review: After finishing Jon Krakauer's amazing "Under the Banner of Heaven," I turned to Denton's book for a fuller account of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. I wasn't disappointed. This book is absolutely incredible. Anyone who reads it will be shaken up by the history of the Mormon Church and what it has santized. How many Mormons today know of Brigham Young's atrocities? If they knew, would they still worship this faith based in the bloodshed of innocent Americans? Mormonism isn't very old. There is very recent history of torture and cruelty by the Mormon people. This history isn't biblical; it's pre-Civil war. Pretty hard to believe anyone could not acknowledge the abomination that was Brigham Young. But back to the book: Ms. Denton is an amazing writer--perhaps among our best today. Her attention to detail, her chronicling of history is beyond praiseworthy. She merits more distinction than she is getting, considering that this book is never talked about. But then again, the media seems to have swept Krakauer's book under the rug, as well. What are the presses afraid of? Whatever the reasons, anyone wanting to educate him or herself about Mormon history--or anyone ignorant to its roots--should read this book as a companion to Krakauer's. And all should cry at the fate of the doomed Fancher party.
Rating:
Summary: Truth with Documentation
Review: An excellent book that details how political and military posturing with mafia-type retaliation for dissenters allowed a religious sect to survive and flourish with lies and deception. The power of this book is not in the truth of the treacherous massacre, as shocking as it is, but in the zealous, fervent belief of the members and followers of such corrupt leadership and doctrine. Read this book to prevent being fooled by the LDS and its false doctrine. Do not expect a member of the church to be swayed by it. Despite the excellent documentation of ALL the incidents, including diaries and testimonies from the murderous Mormon party, Mormons have been indoctrinated since Joseph Smith to smear all facts as lies if they run contrary to the direction of church leadership. This book is not about the hard working ethics and survival of the early Mormon pioneers, but more to the extent of the extremes the church would go to justify the end result... Shocking, revealing and eye opening for those who take the time to absorb the documentation provided.
Rating:
Summary: Poor History!
Review: Another anti-Mormon diatribe! The author's motivation must be questioned. A hate-filled, vindictive volume.
Rating:
Summary: Superb Investigative Report
Review: Denton is the rare investigative reporter whose scholarship, compassion, and ability to write with poetic power are in perfect balance. In American Massacre, Denton tips over a religious rock and finds a nest of corruption, deceit, and despair. She delivers a temperate, detailed investigation of a religious tragedy: The cost of blind obedience and fanaticism that dehumanizes victims and seeks divine approval of even the most heinous crimes against innocents. She carefully details the inevitable corruption of any organization involving fallible humans - often with conflicting agendas - and her research is sound and rigorous. Denton's enthusiasm for the subject lends a subjective, sometimes accusatory, tone to her writing that could perhaps have been tempered by a thorough discussion of the mind-set present in violent confrontations. This is a difficult subject, however, and readers may find Professor Dave Grossman's "On Killing" a suitable companion in understanding how large bodies of ordinary men could be guilty of senseless slaughter. Overall, this is an exciting, well-researched and fair-minded narrative and a powerfully written, superb investigative report. David R. Bannon, Ph.D.; author, "Race Against Evil."
Rating:
Summary: Very thoroughly researched and reliable account
Review: Denton's research is impeccable. It is hard to find a single thing in this book that is not researched and double-checked. She seems to have gotten correct the question of the level of involvement of the local Indians: they were peripherally involved, but the Mormons--as they have done on many other occasions--essentially employed them by offering to share with them the spoils of the massacre. They then used the natives as scapegoats, blaming the whole incident on them (many of the Mormon murderers painted their faces so that they might be mistaken for natives as well). So yes, Indians were involved, but they were hired hands, and in the end the vast majority of the ill-gotten gains went to the Mormon church. Brigham Young was seen for years afterward riding in a wagon stolen from the Baker/Fancher party.This is a great piece of historical writing, and in spite of the Mormon church's strenuous attempts to cover up this ugly story, Denton has brought the truth to light. Beware of one thing: her description of the massacre itself is wrenching and may upset even the most hardened reader.
Rating: 
Summary: The Indians Did It
Review: Denton's work is well-written, but that is the best that can be said of it. It relies principally on old secondary sources, many of which have no attribution to primary sources. One example of the books' biggest defects is its central conclusion that the Paiute Indians did not participate in the massacre. Relying upon the very same Dimick Huntington diary which Will Bagley uses in Blood of the Prophets to prove that the Indians participated in the massacre, Denton uses the diary to argue the Indians didn't participate. Denton misses a major piece of one of the earliest official government reports, from Indian agent Garland Hurt (a bitter enemy of Brigham Young), who hears about the massacre and then sends an agent south to conduct interviews. The agent returns with detailed accounts of interviews of Paiute Indians who admit to beginning the massacre and participating in it, but who blame the Mormons for directing them. Denton's error is rather odd in a deceptive way. She actually cites Hurt's report for a quote that the Indians denied doing it. However, as Hurt reported, he interviewed Ute Indians who really had nothing to do with the massacre, who denied involvement. It was thereafter that Hurt commissioned his investigation which yielded the later confessions contained at the end of his official report. Denton cites the wholly irrelevant denial of the Utes, and ignores the relevant confessions of the Paiutes. Why has she done this? Denton's error on this point alone makes the work of negligible value.
Rating:
Summary: The Indians Did It
Review: Denton's work is well-written, but that is the best that can be said of it. It relies principally on old secondary sources, many of which have no attribution to primary sources. One example of the books' biggest defects is its central conclusion that the Paiute Indians did not participate in the massacre. Relying upon the very same Dimick Huntington diary which Will Bagley uses in Blood of the Prophets to prove that the Indians participated in the massacre, Denton uses the diary to argue the Indians didn't participate. Denton misses a major piece of one of the earliest official government reports, from Indian agent Garland Hurt (a bitter enemy of Brigham Young), who hears about the massacre and then sends an agent south to conduct interviews. The agent returns with detailed accounts of interviews of Paiute Indians who admit to beginning the massacre and participating in it, but who blame the Mormons for directing them. Denton's error is rather odd in a deceptive way. She actually cites Hurt's report for a quote that the Indians denied doing it. However, as Hurt reported, he interviewed Ute Indians who really had nothing to do with the massacre, who denied involvement. It was thereafter that Hurt commissioned his investigation which yielded the later confessions contained at the end of his official report. Denton cites the wholly irrelevant denial of the Utes, and ignores the relevant confessions of the Paiutes. Why has she done this? Denton's error on this point alone makes the work of negligible value.
Rating:
Summary: Poorly researched... seek information elsewhere.
Review: I am always interested in theories regarding who exactly ordered the massacre (as my Grandfather John D. Lee was the only man ever held accountable.) I am not completely convinced that the order did not come from Brigham Young or someone very close to him in the foodchain. But this book is so poorly researched and written that it was hardly worth my time and certainly not worth my money. She gets even the most basic biographical information wrong - information that is readily availible in scores of other books and websites. I honestly don't know why she even bothered...
|
