For Debbie, and for all future commenters, it would be really, really appreciated if, when you disagree with my assessment, you were to support your own assessment. In this case, what makes the book “perfect” for you and your ward sisters? Something like “The book meets my needs because it addresses issues X, Y and Z,” or “… because I learned that Sister X, like me, has struggled with and overcome issue Y,” or something.

When you just say “I liked the book” or “I find the book perfect,” it is the equivalent of my saying “I hated the book” or “I find the book to be absolute garbage” (neither of which statements reflects my views, please be clear). I pointed out specific places in the book where the discussion stopped before it reached the point that I needed to read, and specific places where the book was too general for me to understand and I needed illustrative examples.

That, not a mere “I disagree,” is what is needed from commenters. Thanks.

wrote that Susan Tanner was the sole author of DIMK.

I gave away that copy to a lady I visit teach, and I commented about it based on that first perusal. I kept reading conflicting comments about it, raising my interest to get beyond my first impression, so one evening I went to our meetinghouse and poked around until, sure enough, I found one that someone had abandoned.

I’ve given it a much more thorough inspection, but I can’t say that I’ve changed my mind a great deal, and I really wanted to whole-heartedly like it. I will say that I am blown away by the amount of care in preparation that it shows; it is rather magnificent in a fancy, Sunday-dress sort of way. The layout brings to mind a well-dressed table at a North American Relief Society meeting, with not just any old tablecloth you find in the RS closet, but the one on which your great-grandmother lovingly hand-crocheted the edge, and plenty of fascinating artifacts that illustrate the point of the lesson. No expense or careful effort has been spared: The book itself has die-cut rounded corners, which are not at all necessary, but a very nice touch. Each chapter has its own color theme, and they aren’t the YW colors, these are sophisticated jewel tones. It was printed with at least a 4 color press, and probably more. Every single page has a faint pattern printed onto it that changes with each chapter. The photography for each chapter title is a work of art unto itself, and the rest of the plentiful photos and illustrations are well-designed, thoughtfully chosen, and fully captioned. And the editorial work that is evident — Holy Gutenberg! I can promise you that this publication has been proofread thoroughly. Many times. By professionals. Not only is there an index, but footnotes by chapter, an index of all the visual elements with full information and credits, an illustrated timeline (with those visuals indexed too), and a list of the General Presidencies and the women who served in them. There are plenty of subheads and sidebars and pull quotes to help us along.

The only letdown is in the content. Ardis, you already got to the heart of the main problems with the content. On every page we are told how much we are loved, cherished, and valued, and how great is our calling, but those sentiments are not made real (to me at least) by details of how and why. This is by design, as stated in the preface: “The value of this book is not so much in the dates and facts it provides but in the purposes, principles, and patterns it teaches.” So it is a fancy handbook for sisters, that doesn’t delve too deeply into any of the really unpleasant difficulties women face in the church, either past or present. It’s kind of mind-boggling to read the glossed-over description of the Relief Society being disbanded by Brigham Young, deftly stated (and yet not stated) in a single sentence. All through the book are bits and pieces of facts, and allusions to real life hardship that could tell a poignant story, but instead are bowdlerized to better serve to teach only “purposes, principles, and patterns.”

I think I can find value in this publication, inasmuch as it helps me keep covenants and guides me in setting priorities, but I’d rather just go to the scriptures for that, and cobble together a library of other books, blogs (like Keepa!), and documents from which to learn about the real deal of history, plain and unadorned as best I can find it, which is the way I can most clearly see it, and perhaps glean something useful from it.

I apologize for my long rambling comment.

Then last night I was rereading recent VT messages. The one from June on temporal self-reliance has this paragraph: “In Relief society, we are taught self-reliance principles and skills. sisters can learn about budgeting, debt relief, employment qualifications, the scriptures and the gospel, teaching others to read and learn, technology, physical health, fitness, addiction prevention and recovery, social and emotional health, preventing illness, gardening, food production and storage, emergency preparedness, and many other things that will help us become self-reliant.” We do talk about the gospel, and do a fourth-rate job of learning about the scriptures, and every few months there’s some event where we can buy stuff from the church cannery for food storage, but other than that I can’t remember the last time any of those topics was addressed, even obliquely, in my ward.

I think that, like this neglect of the possibilities for teaching self-reliance, whether or not Relief Society is a true sisterhood depends almost entirely on local conditions and how well the program is put into practice. Maybe with DIMK Sister Beck is trying to inspire local units to do more and be more, by at least getting the attention of local groups with this new approach, and reminding us what we can and should be doing.

I’m rambling, sorry. Not much sleep recently.