Do I dare ask for a reasoned recounting of the literary offenses of Jon Krakauer?

[landpoke]

Or should I just drop it? Don't get me wrong, I fully realize Krakauer's greatest draw is not his writing, but rather the subject matter he chooses and his sometimes vague relationship with facts. That being said I don't recall anything egregiously anti-mainstream Mormon in "Under the Banner of Heaven."

[Archaea]

I'll have to pull my copy out, but he was actually very subtle, yet not so subtle in his blatant misrepresentation of the Church and its culture.

And if you know something about climbing, perhaps you should compare Ed Viesturs No Shortcuts to the Top with Into Thin Air, to see what a hack he is.

It is a legitimate question but to give you a reasoned answer will require I go back and look at specific instances to illustrate my point.

[MikeWaters]

I've already said that is primarily what he chose not to include, as well as broad unfounded conclusions.

[splitbamboo]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I'll have to pull my copy out, but he was actually very subtle, yet not so subtle in his blatant misrepresentation of the Church and its culture.

And if you know something about climbing, perhaps you should compare Ed Viesturs No Shortcuts to the Top with Into Thin Air, to see what a hack he is.

It is a legitimate question but to give you a reasoned answer will require I go back and look at specific instances to illustrate my point.

Didn't President Hinckley quote Ed Viesturs' No Shortcusts?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by splitbamboo

Didn't President Hinckley quote Ed Viesturs' No Shortcusts?

I don't know. I grabbed the book while waiting at the airport and found him to be a fascinating figure.

He has a safety first mentality, which has served him well. "Ascending is optional, descending is mandatory."

After reading his report, you'll find somebody like Crackhead to be completely sensationalistic and useless.

[splitbamboo]

Originally Posted by Archaea

"Ascending is optional, descending is mandatory."

I've only walked up a couple >10K feet peaks, but that's the thing that I always think about in climbing--the getting back down when you're completely exhausted. It's not like once you're at the top you get helicoptered off...

[landpoke]

I've read the criticisms of "Into Thin Air" and I have a good friend who just gets livid about the whole premise of "Into the Wild" so I've been thoroughly disabused of the notion that Krakauer is either a good or unbiased writer. But he does know how to pick interesting subject matter which I suppose is half the battle for an author.

As I said in response to you over in the other thread, I didn't see the subtle insults. Then again I'm not a member of your church so maybe it's just ignorance on my part. I have been known to mistake you all for the Amish so I guess it wouldn't be the first time.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by landpoke

I've read the criticisms of "Into Thin Air" and I have a good friend who just gets livid about the whole premise of "Into the Wild" so I've been thoroughly disabused of the notion that Krakauer is either a good or unbiased writer. But he does know how to pick interesting subject matter which I suppose is half the battle for an author.

As I said in response to you over in the other thread, I didn't see the subtle insults. Then again I'm not a member of your church so maybe it's just ignorance on my part. I have been known to mistake you all for the Amish so I guess it wouldn't be the first time.

Well we who organically understand the faith caught his attempts at subtle deception. However, because he's not a good writer, nor unbiased, those outside the faith may not have caught on to his swipes. For that I can be grateful.

[MikeWaters]

I think I would like Krakauer more if he clearly inserted and stated his own biases and interests. We would say "Ok this is his take, and he admits it, and it's as much an exploration of him as it is the subject material he tackles."

Well, this is what he does, but he does not say so, and that's what pisses people off.

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by landpoke

I have been known to mistake you all for the Amish so I guess it wouldn't be the first time.

Hardy Har Har jokester! Make no mistake about it when Elder Bronco sticks his pecker into the Cowboy State's collective Flaming Gorge this upcoming fall and you are once again reminded why Bronco is hung like a horse as well as the reason to buy your KY Jelly at the Provo Walmart before gametime, you will know that you have been smitten at last!

My honest thought on Krakauer was that I felt he didn't link the events he reference together well to make a point. I tend to think he was purposely vague because he knew the book wasn't well done.

From the perspective of just telling a story of a crazy person who killed someone, it was probably fine. But that is not real compelling in our day and age when you can read any newssource and daily get such a story in 298 pages less reading. Hence, to make it more compelling he had to draw an explanation that part of the reason these folks were crazy was their religion. That is hard to accomplish because at that point the author must really have compelling scholarship about the religious sect as well as the individual. I found the argument of the LDS influence in the craziness to be biased and not reflective of reality. Further as has been pointed out he willingly chose to ignore what might have been other perhaps more compelling causes of their craziness than the Mountain Meadows Massacre or polygamy.