Ryan Reeder
History 490
William Hamblin
April 12, 2001
The focus of Scott Wilkes' paper is how the Teton Dam disaster and the ensuing Church response affected the local communities, primarily represented by his family. Scott was born about a year following the disaster, and grew up hearing stories about it from his family and community members. This sparked his interest in this topic. Consequentially, his paper is a personal essay, as is clear from his first word-"I." From his research, he's established that the principal theme among the victims of the disaster was
"the realization that all the worldly things they were surrounded with mattered little when compared to the lives of their loved ones and of the vital role of charity, especially the help and teachings of the LDS Church in helping to overcome those difficult times."
Such a thesis results in more of a doctrinal, Sunday School lesson type of paper than a scholarly history paper. Rather than a historical paper with religious principles, it is a religious paper with historical principles. His conclusion confirms this topic as his selection of a thesis-
"the greatest legacy of the Teton Flood [is] . . . rather obvious . . . [it] made them realize that all the worldly things they were surrounded with really mattered little when compared to the lives of their families. It helped them to rely more fully upon the teachings of the LDS Church, the kindness of others and it brought them closer together."
The introduction and conclusion are pretty well stated, and the paper is successfully organized in effectively proving the chosen thesis.
The paper begins by describing the history of the dam itself, its construction, burst, and theorized reasons for its destruction. Detail is lacking in this area however, as this covers only two pages or so of the paper as background information. His focus is on how the burst affected his family and community members. Personal accounts of their initial reaction, their response to the cleanup effort, and the Church's aid in the process, as well as long-term individual effects constitute the balance of the paper. It might be useful to clearly identify family members at the beginning of the paper, as they correspond to the greatest focus of the paper. There are occasional problems with transitions, but the internal evidence in each of the sections generally stays on topic. The writing style is clear and easy to read.
The research appears to be somewhat sparse. Only a dozen or so articles are listed in the bibliography, and many of the secondary sources are only touched on incidentally. The use of primary sources are mainly limited to interviews conducted with three of his siblings, and the journal of his mother. There are a couple of other accounts, but the emphasis is with his family. Periodical resources have apparently not been consulted to obtain firsthand reactions to the flooding. Original ideas seem to be lacking in the paper, mainly limited to conclusions of a synthesis of reactions in the vein of a Sunday School lesson.
There are several technical problems throughout the paper; these have been noted as found within the paper. Short numbers need to be spelled out. The use of the term "LDS Church" may want to be brought into conformity with official Church guidelines. Several questions are raised but left unanswered. Other statements are left unclear. These have also been noted.
What is proven in this paper is proven with an effective structure, though the pertinence of the thesis is debatable. Research is largely limited to personal accounts, apparently without exhaustive efforts to discover other potential sources. The style is generally clear and readable, though there are discrepancies and problems within the format. More specific information is included in the paper, along with an attached grading sheet. Overall, I would give this paper a "fair" rating.
Back to Papers