Reader comments
Joseph or not? Display of photo raises interest, doubts
64 comments | Read story
Former Resident | 2:35 a.m. May 1, 2008
So the rumor that Mark Hofmann has a photo studio at the prison is true.
Freeman | 2:56 a.m. May 1, 2008
Well, I guess we'll have to wait until the big meeting at Adam-ondi-Ahman
to find out for sure. In the mean time, it will be fun to read the range of
reactions in this thread. From other threads on other sites, it seems there is
a pretty even split between those who think this is Joseph and those who do not.
Let the games begin!
Comments continue below
Charlotte | 6:02 a.m. May 1, 2008
I can't beleive the church did not learn anything after the Hofmann fiasco.
Derek | 6:21 a.m. May 1, 2008
What a strange article. Mr. Arave apparently attended the press conference
yesteray (or book signing - whatever it was) or at least had access to the
author of the book - the man who says he has spent ten years doing what he
believes to be extensive historical and forensic research on the photo? Why not
one word from Mr. Tracy? Why not one response to the questions of authenticity.
The explanations are in the book and I assume Mr. Tracy is willing to talk about
them on the record. I myself have many doubts and Mr. Bauman's (and
other's) questions are important - but - whether his claims are plausible
or not - provable or not - Mr. Tracy does have a response to all of these points
- the question of the date of the deguerretype, the age of the person in the
photo, the fashion (the colored cravat), the questions of scale. Why not one
small quote from the author? It seems like very sloppy journalism to me.
Lee | 6:57 a.m. May 1, 2008
I have seen a lot of deguerretypes. Most of them are of a poor quality. This one
appears to be in too good of shape.They were extremely rare in the early 19th
century.Also, the individual in the picture might look like a relative or
something like that. But I am convinced it is not Joseph Smith.
Grandma | 7:05 a.m. May 1, 2008
This particular photo has come up before. Although the paintings we have of
Joseph Smith are idealized, which usually happened when individuals were
painted, we have an idea of what Joseph looked like. Is this a photo of him?
Who can tell. Does it really matter? Not to me.
Dale | 7:14 a.m. May 1, 2008
Charlotte ought to read the article again. What an enormously silly comment to
make.
jr | 7:19 a.m. May 1, 2008
Funny how for all these years nothing then suddenly there may be a photo, very
dubious indeed and possibly people should have learned their lesson from
previous claims. I have seen portraits of JSmith over the years and gradually he
has become this hunk instead of the homely man portrayed in the early days of
converting people. Kind of like the paintings of Christ by LDS artist, he looks
more like a Scandi than a middle easterner. Very questionable and convenient
Chad | 7:28 a.m. May 1, 2008
Charlotte, how in the world did you reach the conclusion that a picture
purported to be Joseph Smith, neither owned nor endorsed by the church, and of
high controversy, implies that the church learned nothing from Mark Hofman?
The LDS church does not own the picture, and if you would take the time to read their press release you would find out that they do not endorse the photo as being of J.S. at all.
Get your facts straight before making accusations.
The LDS church does not own the picture, and if you would take the time to read their press release you would find out that they do not endorse the photo as being of J.S. at all.
Get your facts straight before making accusations.
Zelph | 7:40 a.m. May 1, 2008
Of course it is Joseph Smith's photograph. Just compare the death mask to
the photo. They are identical.
Ethan | 7:49 a.m. May 1, 2008
I think the pictures look like Phoenix Suns player Steve Nash.
suzyk | 7:52 a.m. May 1, 2008
To Charlotte...the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints did not sponsor
this function. That was stated in the beginning of the article.
John Hajicek | 7:55 a.m. May 1, 2008
The dag has the words "Taken in 1853" written on the back of it, but I
did not see that noted in the article. Is Tracy explaining that? I have an
1947 reproduction of this image, made in Utah before the Reorganized Church was
handed this dag in the 1960s. Mormonism.com
Mr. Kodak | 8:02 a.m. May 1, 2008
The answer is in the first sentence: "There is no verifide..." and
until it is VERIFIDE one should think SCAM.
bid deal | 8:21 a.m. May 1, 2008
The church has survived and thrived for 178 years without a photo of Joseph. It
makes no difference whether this is the genuine article or not.
Hard to say... | 8:35 a.m. May 1, 2008
The one thing we know for sure is that Joseph Smith looks nothing like the
boulderized portrayls of him in church films and literature. People "back
then" had bad hair days all the time (if they had hair!). They did not
smile because of bad teeth and bad breath. They dressed weird and we would not
like what they looked like. Nonetheless, and in keeping with church policy that
"some true information is not useful", we'll keep showing the
glamorized pictures!
Jon | 8:38 a.m. May 1, 2008
To Former Resident: Thanks for the morning laugh :)
To Derek: Good point, I want to hear what the author of the book has to say in response to the Deg...(however you spell it) experts.
To Lee: Amen
To Ethan: Good observation, I totally see that now.
And to everyone else: I don't think it's him.
To Derek: Good point, I want to hear what the author of the book has to say in response to the Deg...(however you spell it) experts.
To Lee: Amen
To Ethan: Good observation, I totally see that now.
And to everyone else: I don't think it's him.
Steve Nash? | 8:38 a.m. May 1, 2008
I agree.
Charlotte | 8:41 a.m. May 1, 2008
The church is not an organization, it is the people therefore, the author is the
church.
Now I got your attention, what about the picture of Jesus in your living room? When did Jesus ever pose for portrait? I specially object of christian churches displaying picture of Jesus. The only pictures He left are the picture of the cross and the picture of Him in our heart.
I visited the Deseret bookstore once and there was a picture of Joseph Smith fixing Emma's hair; was that really his picture? When claiming the ONLY "True Church" the responsibility to be accurate by in everything is very high.
Now I got your attention, what about the picture of Jesus in your living room? When did Jesus ever pose for portrait? I specially object of christian churches displaying picture of Jesus. The only pictures He left are the picture of the cross and the picture of Him in our heart.
I visited the Deseret bookstore once and there was a picture of Joseph Smith fixing Emma's hair; was that really his picture? When claiming the ONLY "True Church" the responsibility to be accurate by in everything is very high.
who cares | 8:50 a.m. May 1, 2008
who cares if it is or isn't. We don't worship the guy or his history.
Let's stop making it look that way.
It Josephs son... | 8:58 a.m. May 1, 2008
That's not his picture, to young, it's probably his son.
Barry | 9:01 a.m. May 1, 2008
I don't know about you others, but I know, for sure, that is a picture of
Elvis, taken two weeks ago in Argentina. They found him in a compound with an
aging Adolf Hitler. ;)
JazzFan | 9:12 a.m. May 1, 2008
I'm going with the Steve Nash theory. This is just a subtle promo for the
NBA! The old guy looks like John Stockton with grey hair...hmm......?
Nano | 9:14 a.m. May 1, 2008
Just food for thought. I vaguely remember reading somewhere that the painting
of Joseph that we are all familiar with was painted after his death and had used
his death mask as a model. Joseph had suffered severe trama resulting from his
fall, essentially face first, from a second story window to a well curb below.
The bone above his mouth was broken and changed his facial characteristics
dramatically.
As I mentioned, this is based on a vague recollection, if anyone knows differently, or knows the story behind that painting, I'd like to hear from them.
As I mentioned, this is based on a vague recollection, if anyone knows differently, or knows the story behind that painting, I'd like to hear from them.
To - big deal | 9:16 a.m. May 1, 2008
I knew someone would be insecure enough to think this photo has anything to do
with the truthfullness of the Church or Joseph Smith. Yes, the Church will
continue to survive whether or not this photo is genuine. The funny thing is
that no one claims it won't - it's just that any article related to
the Church immediately brings out both the attackers and defenders. But relax, I
find no way even the most vehement anti's can find some way to attack the
truth claims of the Church or Joseph Smith through this photo. I think it would
be very cool to find a photo of Joseph Smith. No one is questioning whether he
existed. This isn't like we are arguing over archeology of the BofM or
something.
Doesn't match | 9:29 a.m. May 1, 2008
Look at the death mask and then look at this photo - the two don't match at
all. The mouth is totally different as well as the nose. It doesn't take a
photography expert to note the differences. The death mask presents a pretty
good representation of the prophet and this photo is not him. Prehaps Steve
Nash's great great great gran-dad???
Steve nash | 9:40 a.m. May 1, 2008
I admit it. It's me.
Anonymous | 9:43 a.m. May 1, 2008
I find it difficult to accept that a photo pre 1850 would be this good.
Linda | 9:50 a.m. May 1, 2008
Hey Guys! Its Joseph Smith! You people are expecting some kind of shining angel
with golden locks upon his head... He was just a ordinary man. I believe this
photograph is truly him, no doubt in my mind whatsoever!
Lumin | 9:53 a.m. May 1, 2008
I think it would be great to find an actual photo of Joseph Smith. People are
so used to thinking he was some kind of genius, buff, macho-man.
Remember, the greatest things he accomplished in his lifetime occurred before he was 24 years old! We're not talking about a college-educated, well-dressed, JRR Tolkien here. When I was 24 years old, there's no way on Earth I could have come up with something like the Book of Mormon and I had a college degree.
Seeing him this way just makes his testimony that much more believable - that Angels, and God himself worked through Smith to bring about the Book of Mormon.
Remember, the greatest things he accomplished in his lifetime occurred before he was 24 years old! We're not talking about a college-educated, well-dressed, JRR Tolkien here. When I was 24 years old, there's no way on Earth I could have come up with something like the Book of Mormon and I had a college degree.
Seeing him this way just makes his testimony that much more believable - that Angels, and God himself worked through Smith to bring about the Book of Mormon.
Sheesh! | 9:58 a.m. May 1, 2008
Rumors, subterfuge, innuendo, assumptions, presumptions, etc., etc., etc.
It's what most of the Mormon faith's history is made up of for the most part, and the little that can be counted on as being of historical veracity, is still minimalized if dark, over emphasized if bright, and in both cases white washed to incredible levels still leaving one to wonder how trustworthy their history is, to the point it's hard to take at face value.
This Joseph Smith photograph stuff has reached unbelievable heights of absurdity when the MormonChurch itself allows and promotes the premise to the point that even though the picture is spurious and unproven, the throngs of blind-faith loyal followers of Mormonism will somehow 'faith' themselves into actually believing that this IS a picture of their founder....
I leave the rest for the reader to figure out.
It's what most of the Mormon faith's history is made up of for the most part, and the little that can be counted on as being of historical veracity, is still minimalized if dark, over emphasized if bright, and in both cases white washed to incredible levels still leaving one to wonder how trustworthy their history is, to the point it's hard to take at face value.
This Joseph Smith photograph stuff has reached unbelievable heights of absurdity when the MormonChurch itself allows and promotes the premise to the point that even though the picture is spurious and unproven, the throngs of blind-faith loyal followers of Mormonism will somehow 'faith' themselves into actually believing that this IS a picture of their founder....
I leave the rest for the reader to figure out.
I know , i know | 10:05 a.m. May 1, 2008
you know, it was one of those fashion statements...kinda like all the guys
trying to look like tom cruise, brad pitt or whomever is IN.Only the Abe Lincoln
look was really in back then...so this could be any smoe for all you know!!
I know it's not me | 10:13 a.m. May 1, 2008
And it obviously cannot be Joseph Smith, the time-frame proves that. It's
someone who might have looked a lot like Joseph Smith although the age of the
individual, the hairstyle and the clothing are all wrong. It could be anyone.
It would be possible to find a great many photos of men who resembled Joseph
Smith and try to make a comparison if you were willing to ignore all the
discrepancies as they have in this case. Let's just dismiss this photo for
who it isn't and be done with it.
FaithNoMo | 10:25 a.m. May 1, 2008
Why doesn't the Prophet ask God next time he sees him? Just like they
should have when Hoffman was getting rich off of the Church. This author is just
banking on the fact that Mormons will buy anything that is faith-promoting. $40
for a book on a picture that may or may not be old Joe?
The Truth | 10:29 a.m. May 1, 2008
I know it is Joseph Smith's photo. I prayed about and have recieved an
answer.
StephenS | 10:46 a.m. May 1, 2008
People will fall for anything. Not him. Not him Not him. Look at that guy he
even looks like a phony.
Where is Emma? These things are usually take in pairs. The wife is not left out of the picture, ever. The era is wrong. There is NO supporting evidence. You people or silly if you believe this gump!
Where is Emma? These things are usually take in pairs. The wife is not left out of the picture, ever. The era is wrong. There is NO supporting evidence. You people or silly if you believe this gump!
To Charlotte: | 10:54 a.m. May 1, 2008
You need to quit taking yourself, and this story, too seriously.
Heidi | 11:55 a.m. May 1, 2008
It is an interesting picture. I wonder who decided that it may be Joseph Smith
in the first place. The Prophet Joseph Smith was a jolly, fun-loving, play with
the kids kind of man. This person looks rather dour. I know that back then
people had to hold still for a long time for the camera to finish its business,
so perhaps that's why this fellow looks so dour. It doesn't look to
me that this fellow's face matches Joseph's bone structure based on
the death mask. Joseph also had a bigger build and I believe that Joseph was
much better-looking than this poor fellow. I believe the daguerro-type experts
that this photo was taken after 1844. After all, the plate was marked 1848. I
think Eborn is a good company. I like their bookstore in the Valley Fair Mall.
I'm a collector of antique books. Eborn also has published 5 of my
cousin's books.
jtm | 11:59 a.m. May 1, 2008
Doesn't look like paintings of him, I say it's not him
Willard B. | 12:09 p.m. May 1, 2008
What is this daguerreotype's provenance? How did it come into possession
of the Community of Christ? Was it a part of a collection of other Smith family
members? Was it part of a collection of Nauvoo Mormons? From where did it
come?
How closely does Joseph Smith's death mask match up to other images of 19th century men?
The questions posed by the skeptics quoted in the article seem pretty significant. I'm far from convinced, if even outright skeptical. The book and painting promotion doesn't help my skepticism.
How closely does Joseph Smith's death mask match up to other images of 19th century men?
The questions posed by the skeptics quoted in the article seem pretty significant. I'm far from convinced, if even outright skeptical. The book and painting promotion doesn't help my skepticism.
No One Looked Too Good | 12:21 p.m. May 1, 2008
Due to technology back in the day no one looks good in those pictures. Today,
LDS single adults meet online because technology (and occassionally outright
deception) makes everyone look reasonably good in a picture. Back then passing
pictures like this around would not have resulted in a whole lot of dates.
Luckily, plural marriage was introduced to take care of the LDS single adult
problem back then. Until it is reintroduced I will have to rely on the online
dating circus I guess.
Rich | 12:34 p.m. May 1, 2008
I doubt the picture shows Joseph Smith. But if it is the physical appearance of
Joseph matters little to me. What matters is his teaching. One cannot
seriously study Joseph and his teachings for years without admiring him and
coming to the following conclusion: Either he was a prophet inspired by God or
the greatest genius the world has known -- a charlatan who was willing to die to
preserve his reputation. I choose the former because of the spirit I have felt
through reading his words and seeing the fruits of his labors.
Colorado | 12:41 p.m. May 1, 2008
To "Sheesh!" There's a lot of people that don't agree with
the Mormons; mostly because their sources of information come from enemies of
the church, which to say the least, are not an accurate, truthful, or reliable
source. What amazes me is that since its beginning, in this country which
professes "freedom of religion" the people of the church lost all -
even their lives. All they wanted was to be left alone to practice and live
their "chosen" religion. It was only after they were forced out of
one state after another and finally settled in Utah, that most of the
persecution stopped. Whatever anyone wishes to believe, that history will
forever be a black mark on this nation.
As for you, it is not my right to judge - but this much I do know, you're a very angry individual that should not carry so much hatred for a church you know nothing about.
The church will always have its enemies. Isn't it interesting that for the past 178 years the church has survived it all and is thriving. Those in the past who tried to destroy it are gone and are of no consequence.
As for you, it is not my right to judge - but this much I do know, you're a very angry individual that should not carry so much hatred for a church you know nothing about.
The church will always have its enemies. Isn't it interesting that for the past 178 years the church has survived it all and is thriving. Those in the past who tried to destroy it are gone and are of no consequence.
Mor-Man | 12:52 p.m. May 1, 2008
It's Funny one can comment and state they prayed about the picture of said
J Smith. Like in the way instant revelations happned in the LDS church with
Plural Marriage?
Mills Levan | 1:08 p.m. May 1, 2008
What difference could this possibly make to anyone, LDS Church member or not? It
has nothing whatever to do with anything of import, say like, the Gospel of
Jesus Christ. I agree with the posts that say the only reason this is "out
there" is to sell books to gullible people. Expensive books at that.
GET OVER YOURSELVES | 1:13 p.m. May 1, 2008
Relax, Charlotte & "Mor-Man, etc! Its just an old photo, for
cryin' out loud! A person has done some reasearch, and from that states
that he believes that the person in the photo may be Joseph Smith.
Nothing more, nothing less. There is nothing in this article that should generate some of the comments that have been made. Nothing that implicates that the Church's leadership has done anything, good or bad. IT'S JUST A SHOWING OF AN OLD PHOTOGRAPH!
Why does any article that mentions the Church in some way, no matter the subject, no matter the length, leads people to write comments that they wouldn't say out loud? No one is forcing you to read the articles, or believe in the Gospel. That is your choice. Why can't you just leave well enough alone? It's nothing to you what other people believe, what articles they read, or what photographs they look at.
GET OVER YOURSELVES, PEOPLE.
Nothing more, nothing less. There is nothing in this article that should generate some of the comments that have been made. Nothing that implicates that the Church's leadership has done anything, good or bad. IT'S JUST A SHOWING OF AN OLD PHOTOGRAPH!
Why does any article that mentions the Church in some way, no matter the subject, no matter the length, leads people to write comments that they wouldn't say out loud? No one is forcing you to read the articles, or believe in the Gospel. That is your choice. Why can't you just leave well enough alone? It's nothing to you what other people believe, what articles they read, or what photographs they look at.
GET OVER YOURSELVES, PEOPLE.
Seattle | 1:53 p.m. May 1, 2008
If having a more accurate picture of Joseph is important to the Church,why dont
they have a reconstruction artist make an bust of his face from the death mask?
They can do an amazing job these days. It wouldnt be exact but it would be
interesting to see what it looked like.
As others have said, we dont worship Joseph so it doesnt really matter. Just as long as his hair covers the small protruding horns on his head we will be fine.
Remember, we "live" in a day of prophets. No one else can say that. I like to look at these men as normal as they look and think, Oh, so this is how Paul or Peter looked in their day. Just normal people with common or even odd features. I expect they are all a lot shorter and plumper than we expect.
Live is good. As with parenting the first rule is "dont over react".
As others have said, we dont worship Joseph so it doesnt really matter. Just as long as his hair covers the small protruding horns on his head we will be fine.
Remember, we "live" in a day of prophets. No one else can say that. I like to look at these men as normal as they look and think, Oh, so this is how Paul or Peter looked in their day. Just normal people with common or even odd features. I expect they are all a lot shorter and plumper than we expect.
Live is good. As with parenting the first rule is "dont over react".
Derek | 1:58 p.m. May 1, 2008
To Willard B.
What are you talking about?! You say the book and the painting promotion 'doesn't help my skepticsm'. What on earth does that mean? Let me say it again - the book deals with pretty much all of the criticisms raised in the article and in this thread. You may not buy his explanations - like I said - I have my own doubts - but Tracy has perfectly plausible responses to all of these concerns. You can't go by this terribly written article or a quick glance at the book's promotion. I've seen the book It deals with the question of the subject's age, the date of the of the degeurretype (sp) itself, the death mask etc. He has forensic evidence based on measurements of Smith's skull - he even uses phrenelogy measurements from Smith's papers that helped him piece things together. He talks about provenance, he uses letters and journal entries from Smith, Emma and their contemporaries etc. For heaven's sake, would someone please at least glance at his evidence before making a pronouncement. Of course it doesn't matter in the scheme of things whether it's Josepth - but it's worth a look.
What are you talking about?! You say the book and the painting promotion 'doesn't help my skepticsm'. What on earth does that mean? Let me say it again - the book deals with pretty much all of the criticisms raised in the article and in this thread. You may not buy his explanations - like I said - I have my own doubts - but Tracy has perfectly plausible responses to all of these concerns. You can't go by this terribly written article or a quick glance at the book's promotion. I've seen the book It deals with the question of the subject's age, the date of the of the degeurretype (sp) itself, the death mask etc. He has forensic evidence based on measurements of Smith's skull - he even uses phrenelogy measurements from Smith's papers that helped him piece things together. He talks about provenance, he uses letters and journal entries from Smith, Emma and their contemporaries etc. For heaven's sake, would someone please at least glance at his evidence before making a pronouncement. Of course it doesn't matter in the scheme of things whether it's Josepth - but it's worth a look.
THANK YOU! | 3:51 p.m. May 1, 2008
Thank you, "Get over yourselves." Well said!!! It's just a
blasted photo. Some people think it's him, some don't. Leave it at
that, because that's all it is!
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Prefecture serves up nuts to Japan 3:50 p.m.
- Treasures: Give it a whirl 3:48 p.m.
- The holidays are all relative 3:46 p.m.
- Are we bad for getting mad? 3:44 p.m.
- A 'live it' book, not a 'diet book' 3:42 p.m.
- S.L. County councilman resigns 3:38 p.m.
- Strategies for dodging colds, flu 3:36 p.m.
- Creating the meadow of your dreams 3:33 p.m.
- Overcome grief during holidays 3:29 p.m.
- Herding Squirrels: I'm turning 40 3:24 p.m.
- Donny and Kym dance to victory
- Howard made the rivalry a rivalry
- Cougars cruise past Southern
- Crews working to free man in cave
- Loyal to Cougarettes, Crimson Line
- Witness describes '99 killing
- Twitterati to BCS: 'We hate you.'
- Y. focused on 10-win season
- BYU has slim shot at BCS
- Thunder rolls by Jazz
- BYU would like friendlier rivalry
256 - Glenn Beck to enter politics?226
- Protests against Phoenix LDS temple205
- RSL wins MLS Cup on penalty kicks202
- Bronco, Kyle rubber match138
- BYU records with win133
- Letters: Rushing to judge Palin129
- Hall, Johnson matchup key102
- 4A: Timpview wins 4th in 4 years96
- Thunder rolls by Jazz93
Latest comments
I look forward to a successful rescue. Sealing up the cave with his body...
To "re: RedShirt | 3:20 p.m. " according to the Austrialian article "Change...
Ward = a local congregation. I have heard the meeting house called ward...
How many of us take a look at the homeless and just turn our heads;we are all...
How did you derive that you should "be depressed and unfulfilled" from the...
Don't worry Cougar fans, this guy is a Ute fan. He's a troll. Don't believe...
The biggest problem i see with BYU on Saturday is that their offense is a...
Yea, and if the BCS was around in 1996, BYU would add another championship to...
I am not sure that Coach Sloan is the one that should be held accountable....
Re: "Why do you suppose it is that neocons . . . childishly stick their...
Advertisements
It's your money so spend it as you will. Caveat Emptor and all that. Joseph Smith is probably having a good chuckle about all this.