Who is reading "No Man Knows..."

[MikeWaters]

The same people who buy these books (according to Amazon):

Customers who bought this item also bought

* The Mormon Conspiracy by Charles L. Wood
* The Mountain Meadows Massacre by Juanita Brooks
* By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus: A New Look at the Joseph Smith Papyri by Charles M. Larson
* An Insider's View of Mormon Origins by Grant H. Palmer
* Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith by Jon Krakauer

I haven't read Brooks book, but I will someday.

Ironic that Krakauer would be lumped together with Brodie in this case. Ironic and fitting.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Ironic that Krakauer would be lumped together with Brodie in this case. Ironic and fitting.

Ironic perhaps to the believer. When I ordered 'No Man' I chuckled when I saw the Krakauer book. The Krakauer book is such a bad example of scholarship that it doesn't seem fitting to recommend it when one purchases a well researched work.

[Goatnapper'96]

I really enjoyed it. As interested in Sister Brooks as I was the events surrounging the massacre. Culture and socialization are powerful forces. I am not sure of even being aware of the disaster such forces have created can prevent future disasters.

I read a good portion of Krakauer's work. It sucked hind tiddy.

I doubt I will read Fawn's work.

I just started BH Roberts' "Rise and Fall of Nauvoo." I busted out laughing at his introduction when he states the purpose of his book is to bolster the faith of the Saints. Normal adage about studying history is to ensure we do not repeat it, LDS history seems to flop that around and approach its history with the intent to repeat it.

I have no issues with academics scoffing at LDS academia. They get to define the rules of their game from their own ivory towers. If a needlenecked pussy whose biggest occupational hazzard is a paper cut determines that mormon academics don't cut the mustard because the purpose of BH Roberts' books are the pattern religion wide, it bothers me so little.

I think the pursuit of truth is noble, I feel likewise about Elder Roberts' stated purpose.

Boobs are in. That is a noble truth, trust me.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Apparently, I am in a minority of folks inside the church that enjoyed "Under the Banner of Heaven". I have always been a fan of Krakauer's writing and have read all of his books. Of course, my favorite is still "Into Thin Air".

I am not saying that this is a great academic work or a great history book. However, I found it to be better than I was led to believe based on some of the reviews I had read from LDS readers. Yes, the distorted descriptions of LDS culture made me chuckle at times and he did not portray a flattering picture of the church (or religion in general), but I think his facts were basically correct. It was more a matter of how it was portrayed. But if you tell a sordid tale such as this, everything in the story will suffer some by association. Nevertheless, it was a fascinating story written by a gifted author.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Apparently, I am in a minority of folks inside the church that enjoyed "Under the Banner of Heaven". I have always been a fan of Krakauer's writing and have read all of his books. Of course, my favorite is still "Into Thin Air".

I am not saying that this is a great academic work or a great history book. However, I found it to be better than I was led to believe based on some of the reviews I had read from LDS readers. Yes, the distorted descriptions of LDS culture made me chuckle at times and he did not portray a flattering picture of the church (or religion in general), but I think his facts were basically correct. It was more a matter of how it was portrayed. But if you tell a sordid tale such as this, everything in the story will suffer some by association. Nevertheless, it was a fascinating story written by a gifted author.

I read Into Thin Air about 5-6 years ago and really liked it.

However, I've no desire to read his other books.

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Apparently, I am in a minority of folks inside the church that enjoyed "Under the Banner of Heaven". I have always been a fan of Krakauer's writing and have read all of his books. Of course, my favorite is still "Into Thin Air".

I am not saying that this is a great academic work or a great history book. However, I found it to be better than I was led to believe based on some of the reviews I had read from LDS readers. Yes, the distorted descriptions of LDS culture made me chuckle at times and he did not portray a flattering picture of the church (or religion in general), but I think his facts were basically correct. It was more a matter of how it was portrayed. But if you tell a sordid tale such as this, everything in the story will suffer some by association. Nevertheless, it was a fascinating story written by a gifted author.

I also enjoyed the book. Krakauer is not an academicien, and his book was not intended as a work of scholarship. He's a storyteller, and his book tells a compelling story about a couple of crazy brothers and the part religion played in their insanity. He takes some swipes at the mormon church in the process, but the book takes a swipe at religion in general. When I look at the state of the world and see the part that religion plays in the many problems of the world, it's difficult for me to completely dismiss Krakauer's primary assertion that religious zealotry naturally leads to violence.

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Apparently, I am in a minority of folks inside the church that enjoyed "Under the Banner of Heaven". I have always been a fan of Krakauer's writing and have read all of his books. Of course, my favorite is still "Into Thin Air".

I am not saying that this is a great academic work or a great history book. However, I found it to be better than I was led to believe based on some of the reviews I had read from LDS readers. Yes, the distorted descriptions of LDS culture made me chuckle at times and he did not portray a flattering picture of the church (or religion in general), but I think his facts were basically correct. It was more a matter of how it was portrayed. But if you tell a sordid tale such as this, everything in the story will suffer some by association. Nevertheless, it was a fascinating story written by a gifted author.

I thought it was disjointed. The premise seemed to be based in polygamy yet the conclusion was based upon personal revelation. I think a book on religious fanatacism or extremism based upon the concept that crazy people who believe God talks to them does not really distinguish the LDS Church from any other religion caused Krak to start out with the polygamy angle. I felt he was grasping for straws as he wanted to do an expose on the LDS Church based upon polygamy, but with respect to the brothers (name forgotten) who executed the "death revelation" polygamy was not the real source of the wackiness. It was an periphery issue. Certainly, polygamy was one concept the sister in law was opposed to but the verification of their derangement was in the revelation. I think Krak knew it was hard to do an expose of mormon personal revelation and distinguish the mormon issues from other religions so he starts out with Deloy Bateman searching for scorpions in southern Utah/norther AZ.

With this as my intro, any book on polygamy within the FLDS is crap IMO. The FLDS are so mistrusting of outsiders that the only perspective one gets of polygamy within FLDS is from jaundiced apostates of their sect. Usually those folks have legitimate issues, but it is academically ingenuine.

I also think their chicks need to show a little more leg and perhaps some cleavage. I mean I have seen endowed, I mean very endowed, Bishop's wifes showing off a little bit of their bad boys, why not the Polygs?

[MikeWaters]

In science we don't take a case report and then make generalized assumptions about the world and call it truth.

The Lafferty's were crazy. They grew up in Mormon culture. That doesn't mean that Mormonism produced the Lafferty's, yet that is his conclusion.

I have talked to someone that knew the Lafferty family (grew up with them), and says that the Father was very, very strange. Very weird ideas. And prone to violent outbursts.

Funny how Krakauer never mentions this. Because Krakauer had an agenda. And crazy, violent dad produces crazy, violent kids did not fit his thesis that religion produced them.

So much for the truth. And he got Mormonism so wrong as to be ludicrous.

But, I guess, like Brodie, he gets credit for writing readable prose.

I have an apostate friend that is very connected with the apostate intelligentsia, and he says the general consensus is that it is a terrible book.

But definitely readable. If not honest.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

In science we don't take a case report and then make generalized assumptions about the world and call it truth.

The Lafferty's were crazy. They grew up in Mormon culture. That doesn't mean that Mormonism produced the Lafferty's, yet that is his conclusion.

I think you have over-simplified his thesis.

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I have talked to someone that knew the Lafferty family (grew up with them), and says that the Father was very, very strange. Very weird ideas. And prone to violent outbursts.

Funny how Krakauer never mentions this. Because Krakauer had an agenda. And crazy, violent dad produces crazy, violent kids did not fit his thesis that religion produced them.

Did we read the same book? I recall reading quite a bit about how crazy the old man was.

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

So much for the truth. And he got Mormonism so wrong as to be ludicrous.

It all comes down to a question of degree, I suppose. As I was reading the book, I recall thinking "This is it? What was all the fuss about?" relative to bitter reviews (such as yours) from LDS readers.

[non sequitur]

I approached Krakauer's book the same way I approached "In Cold Blood" when I first read it. The Lafferty brothers story was one that hadn't really been told outside the newspapers, and it was a compelling story. I don't think most people who read the book look at it as some sort of expose on the mormon church. Most people are smart enough to realize that the Lafferty brothers are not representative of mormons in general.