that's the hack job by the guy who wrote the
 

Mt. Everest novel.

He didn't research it very well. About as good as Fawn Brodies.

some people I think justify their intellectual dishonest (at least on a subconscious level) due to their weak testimony.

Hence when the storm comes, the little rickety house is washed away.

Under the Banner of Heaven is marginally interesting. But the biggest criticism I have is that the author just plain does not get what Mormonism and Mormon culture is about. He spent probably half the research time he ought to have. I ended up reading it because a coworker was asking me questions about it.

i know krakauer personally....
 

hes spent time at my parents home....

ive broken bread with him numerous times....

first hes a very gifted writer....

second he is irresponsible in his writing style....he identifies himself with the people he writes about and thus writes a biased piece about their trials....

for example he wrote into the wild, very solid book, but he compares a climb he did to what the main character of the book does....what he fails to see is jon was one of the best climbers in the world, the kid who writes about was as inexperienced as it gets....

third, he knew under the banner of heaven was crap....its the book hes been wanting to write for a long time but knew he couldnt get a publisher unless he wrote something good first, into thin air afforded him this....

it was funny, i went with my father, to a book signing he did in utah when he released under the banner of heaven, he was quite embarassed to see us there.....

What do you mean that he knew Under the Banner of Heaven was crap?

And why was he embarrassed to see you?

simple explanation...
 

he knew his book was horribly written, not factually grounded, etc....

he knows my family is very a devout lds family and was embarassed to see us there...hes a very emotional man in certain aspects and i believe seeing us there kind of threw him off guard. kind of like when youve lied about a friend and he shows up to support you in an endeavor and you both know youve lied but instead of admitting it you sheepishly sit....

one of those situations.

he knew his book was based on a lot of hearsay and slanted to fit his paradigm...which is consistent for his writing style.

He's been featured in a bunch of NPR pieces on fundamentalists, offering opinions and commentary. I think he is on some sort of anti- fundamentalist Mormon mission. Flyovers in Texas.

btw, I'm going to have to practice this thread splitting thing. I tried to split the thread and ended up erasing the orginal thread. So I had to use the browser back button to retrieve Rebelx's orginal post. Sorry about that.

I read the book and found it pretty interesting. . .
 

His basic premise is accurate. He contends that religious zealotry can lead to violence. If people feel they are justified by God to commit violence, there if very little to stop them. That's a premise that is hardly disputable.

I disagree with his assertion because he provides no evidence.

In fact, in the example he used of the Lafferty's, he completely failed to disclose the dynamics of the family. The father was a strange, odd, violent man. Bernard knew the family well. This man for example killed the family dog, this man had odd dietary beliefs. This man ripped the glasses off a kid in high school, while doing a physical, threw them against the wall, and said "if you ate more peas, you wouldn't need glasses."

Strange that the author failed to disclose any of this. Religion was the facade. Something deeper and darker was going on in that family.

Krakauer is intellectually dishonest. And just on this basis his book is total crap. He offers no empirical evidence for any of his assertions.

I have read all of JK's books and have always been a fan. I have mixed feelings about Under the Banner of Heaven. As with his other books, it was a page turner. They guy is a gifted writer and this is most definitely a fascinating story. On the other hand, I was a little disappointed in some of his portrayals. For example, he made it sound like going to the Hill Cummorah pageant for an LDS person is much like going to Mecca for a muslim. I honestly can't think of a single person I know who has been to it. And I have no plans to attend myself. I got a good belly laugh on that one.

The other thing that disappointed me a bit was that after reading an entire book on such a violent and extreme case of Mormon fundamentalism, you can't help but get a skewed perception of LDS society. As an example, I was reading through the reviews for the book on amazon.com and there were some folks who mentioned that after reading the book they were afraid to travel to Utah or walk the streets in Utah at night. Amazing.