Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.95 AVERAGE
3.95 AVERAGE
I got bored :/ I thought this would be more true crime than a summary of mormon history… Just not my thing.
audiobook - another excellent read/listen by one of my favourite writers. some of the Mormon history was a little dull, I was most interested in the crime aspect but it also made a lot of sense why it was included, building a whole understanding of how these events were brought about. religion is wild man.
Fascinating and frightening. Love this narrator. Thanks for the recommendation Susan Ingram.
I think this book is Krakauer's attempt to emulate Truman Capote. He traces a couple of hideous murders done by a Fundamentalist Morman, interweaving the origins of the Morman faith and the splits that lead to fundamentalist sects, and how the religions influenced the murderer.
It's all well done, and Krakauer is a talented writer, but he manages to present everything in such a way that Mormonism just looks incredibly stupid, to the point where you can't imagine anyone taking it seriously. Now, I'm not Mormon and I do believe it, like all faiths, has some silly bits. But I have intelligent friends who ARE Mormons, and I'm pretty sure there's a way of presenting their fundamental beliefs that isn't quite so sneery.
Also, in the end, the guy who did the murders is really just a scumbag. He presents himself as a religious zealot, but still had no problem going on a drinking/drug rampage to steal stuff as a prelude and post-lude to the murders. I'm not at all convinced that fundamentalist Mormonism had much to do with his actions. So if Krakauer was trying to demonstrate that it did, he failed.
Anyway, well written and interesting but I think it's fundamentally dishonest to pretend to present an 'objective' history while actually framing everything to make the reader laugh at/ridicule/despise everything about Mormonism.
It's all well done, and Krakauer is a talented writer, but he manages to present everything in such a way that Mormonism just looks incredibly stupid, to the point where you can't imagine anyone taking it seriously. Now, I'm not Mormon and I do believe it, like all faiths, has some silly bits. But I have intelligent friends who ARE Mormons, and I'm pretty sure there's a way of presenting their fundamental beliefs that isn't quite so sneery.
Also, in the end, the guy who did the murders is really just a scumbag. He presents himself as a religious zealot, but still had no problem going on a drinking/drug rampage to steal stuff as a prelude and post-lude to the murders. I'm not at all convinced that fundamentalist Mormonism had much to do with his actions. So if Krakauer was trying to demonstrate that it did, he failed.
Anyway, well written and interesting but I think it's fundamentally dishonest to pretend to present an 'objective' history while actually framing everything to make the reader laugh at/ridicule/despise everything about Mormonism.
very interesting. Towards the end I just wanted to be done with it.
I just reread this since many people have been once again asking me what I think of Under the Banner of Heaven thanks to the new hulu series (that sadly, I cannot watch because it is not available in Germany). Truthfully, it did not have as many errors as I remembered. This time only 6 factual errors jumped out at me (yes, one could argue whether or not Brigham Young was involved in the Mountain Meadows Massacre but I get that there is evidence on both sides, so I am not going to complain about that. heck, I'm not even sure what I believe on that point. And I feel the same about all the church history stuff, I am not going to say Krakauer errored because those are hotly debated topics with contradicting sources). Anyway, on to the actual errors.
1: Krakauer says in Chapter 4 that the white robes, Mitchell and Barzee wore and forced Elizabeth to wear, "resembled the sacred robes she had donned with her family when they entered the Mormon temple." Sorry Mr. Krakauer, Ms Smart did not wear robes in the temple at age 14. That is not allowed to happen. Children do not wear temple robes.
2. In Chapter Six, Krakauer says that "most latter-day saints make a pilgrimage" to Hill Comorah. Nope. Some do, of course, but it is no where near most. In fact, as of 1996, Mormons living outside the US outnumber Mormons living inside the US. Millions of Mormons are not using their life saving to come visit a hill in New York. It doesn't happen.
(https://www.deseret.com/1996/2/26/19227274/members-living-abroad-outnumber-lds-in-u-s#:~:text=Latter%2Dday%20Saints%20living%20outside,new%20member%20every%2090%20seconds.).
3. Krakauer is also inaccurate about how he describes the Doctrine and Covenants. In chapter 6, he describes the Doctrine and Covenants as being a compilation of "each Mormon prophets" ongoing revelation. This is not accurate as the last section of the D&C was the reversal of the priesthood ban in 1978. Since then, no prophet has added to the book. But then in Chapter 7, he directly contradicts himself and describes the Doctrine and Covenants as "the collected revelations of Joseph Smith). This is just lazy writing. At the very least, his editor should have caught the inconsistency. Also, and this may seem a little nitpicky but, come on, The "Doctrine and Covenants," has not "supplanted the Book of Mormon as the Latter-Day Saints most consequential scriptural text". We didn't get the nickname Mormons for nothing. I am sure if you asked 100 Mormons what the most consequential Mormon text is, over 90 would say the book of Mormon.
4. Krakauer refers (in Chapter 7) to Mark E Peterson as the President of the LDS Church. Mark Peterson has never been the president of the church.
5. Krakauer says (in Chapter 15) that the Laban in the book of Mormon is the same Laban as the Laban in the old testament, when the time periods are over 1000 years apart.
6. In Chapter 7, Krakauer asserts that the "church forbids abortions, and frowns on contraception". Interestingly, the Mormon Church actually has one the most lenient abortion stances of mainstream Christianity in the US that I know of. The Gospel Topics on the official LDS website says this about abortion: "Church leaders have said that some exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth". Listing reasons that an abortion can be justified is a far cry from forbidding. Likewise, the LDS church says this about birth control. "Decisions about birth control and the consequences of those decisions rest solely with each married couple". If Krakauer couldn't be bothered to check the primary source on these things, why should I trust him on other matters?
Okay, enough about lazy fact checking. On to the story. I found parts of the book fascinating. The Lafferty Brothers and their story is horrifying and spellbinding. Likewise, I found myself gasping in dismay at being reminded of the horrors that happened in the Mountain Meadows Massacre. The other parts of the book seem to bounce around in an incoherent way between different polygamy sects and negatives from church history. I didn't find those ports compelling or well organized.
I do think his self proclaimed point--that violence springing from religion is not just a Muslim problem (he wrote this as a response to 9-11), but a larger religious issue-- is important and worth discussing. However, Krakauer does not do a good job making this point. By presenting a biased, negative view of Mormonims, he undermines his own point that violence can come from any religion. Instead he makes Mormonism seem weird and irrational even in its mainstream form, which allows his readers to shrug and say, "man, that Mormon religion is weird and dangerous just like Islam. Good thing, I'm not part of anything like that", rather than thinking deeply about their own religious roots. The book would have been so much more powerful, if he had made violence in religion an "us" problem instead of a "them" problem.
1: Krakauer says in Chapter 4 that the white robes, Mitchell and Barzee wore and forced Elizabeth to wear, "resembled the sacred robes she had donned with her family when they entered the Mormon temple." Sorry Mr. Krakauer, Ms Smart did not wear robes in the temple at age 14. That is not allowed to happen. Children do not wear temple robes.
2. In Chapter Six, Krakauer says that "most latter-day saints make a pilgrimage" to Hill Comorah. Nope. Some do, of course, but it is no where near most. In fact, as of 1996, Mormons living outside the US outnumber Mormons living inside the US. Millions of Mormons are not using their life saving to come visit a hill in New York. It doesn't happen.
(https://www.deseret.com/1996/2/26/19227274/members-living-abroad-outnumber-lds-in-u-s#:~:text=Latter%2Dday%20Saints%20living%20outside,new%20member%20every%2090%20seconds.).
3. Krakauer is also inaccurate about how he describes the Doctrine and Covenants. In chapter 6, he describes the Doctrine and Covenants as being a compilation of "each Mormon prophets" ongoing revelation. This is not accurate as the last section of the D&C was the reversal of the priesthood ban in 1978. Since then, no prophet has added to the book. But then in Chapter 7, he directly contradicts himself and describes the Doctrine and Covenants as "the collected revelations of Joseph Smith). This is just lazy writing. At the very least, his editor should have caught the inconsistency. Also, and this may seem a little nitpicky but, come on, The "Doctrine and Covenants," has not "supplanted the Book of Mormon as the Latter-Day Saints most consequential scriptural text". We didn't get the nickname Mormons for nothing. I am sure if you asked 100 Mormons what the most consequential Mormon text is, over 90 would say the book of Mormon.
4. Krakauer refers (in Chapter 7) to Mark E Peterson as the President of the LDS Church. Mark Peterson has never been the president of the church.
5. Krakauer says (in Chapter 15) that the Laban in the book of Mormon is the same Laban as the Laban in the old testament, when the time periods are over 1000 years apart.
6. In Chapter 7, Krakauer asserts that the "church forbids abortions, and frowns on contraception". Interestingly, the Mormon Church actually has one the most lenient abortion stances of mainstream Christianity in the US that I know of. The Gospel Topics on the official LDS website says this about abortion: "Church leaders have said that some exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth". Listing reasons that an abortion can be justified is a far cry from forbidding. Likewise, the LDS church says this about birth control. "Decisions about birth control and the consequences of those decisions rest solely with each married couple". If Krakauer couldn't be bothered to check the primary source on these things, why should I trust him on other matters?
Okay, enough about lazy fact checking. On to the story. I found parts of the book fascinating. The Lafferty Brothers and their story is horrifying and spellbinding. Likewise, I found myself gasping in dismay at being reminded of the horrors that happened in the Mountain Meadows Massacre. The other parts of the book seem to bounce around in an incoherent way between different polygamy sects and negatives from church history. I didn't find those ports compelling or well organized.
I do think his self proclaimed point--that violence springing from religion is not just a Muslim problem (he wrote this as a response to 9-11), but a larger religious issue-- is important and worth discussing. However, Krakauer does not do a good job making this point. By presenting a biased, negative view of Mormonims, he undermines his own point that violence can come from any religion. Instead he makes Mormonism seem weird and irrational even in its mainstream form, which allows his readers to shrug and say, "man, that Mormon religion is weird and dangerous just like Islam. Good thing, I'm not part of anything like that", rather than thinking deeply about their own religious roots. The book would have been so much more powerful, if he had made violence in religion an "us" problem instead of a "them" problem.
I read this book a while ago. Krakauer does a great job of explaining the FDLS. It's shocking to think that this exists in America today.
emotional
informative
reflective
sad
medium-paced
This book was so informative and felt unbiased. It was so frustrating seeing the effects of one man's words, twisted and interpreted by so many men, resulting in murder, rape, surrender, and acceptance. This is a perfect portrayal of the bystander effect, and the control religion holds over morality and humanity.
"But some things are more important than being happy, like being free to think for yourself."
"But some things are more important than being happy, like being free to think for yourself."
I started this back in July 2022 but it came due before I could finish it, but I really powered through the last half once I got it back from the library. It's a long, but still riveting listen.
There's a lot going on in this book, shifting between history and the founding of the Mormon church to the modern-day murder and the fundamentalist splinter sects with a real penchant for violence among them. There's no real "mystery" to the true crime aspect of the book, since the salient details are laid out from the outset, but instead, this book provides a rather incisive look into the mindset of two murderers who apparently believed they were on some kind of mission from their god. It brings up lots of good questions about where the line between belief and fanaticism/insanity are, and looking back at the founding of the church and how these splinter groups formed, you can see that the mindset of violence was built in from the beginning.
I’ve been meaning to read Jon Krakauer’s work for quite some time, and this was a great entry point. I’d love to read more of his nonfiction, and am also curious to check out the limited series adaptation of this book. There’s lots more content out now covering these kind of fundamentalist cults than there was when the book originally came out. In particular, this called to mind the recent and very disturbing Netflix documentary Keep Sweet: Pray and Obey, which focuses on the rise of Warren Jeffs in the FLDS Church. The more stories from the inside that come out, I think the more society can name and shame the abusive power-trippers at the center of so many of these cults, which can only be a good thing in the long run.
There's a lot going on in this book, shifting between history and the founding of the Mormon church to the modern-day murder and the fundamentalist splinter sects with a real penchant for violence among them. There's no real "mystery" to the true crime aspect of the book, since the salient details are laid out from the outset, but instead, this book provides a rather incisive look into the mindset of two murderers who apparently believed they were on some kind of mission from their god. It brings up lots of good questions about where the line between belief and fanaticism/insanity are, and looking back at the founding of the church and how these splinter groups formed, you can see that the mindset of violence was built in from the beginning.
I’ve been meaning to read Jon Krakauer’s work for quite some time, and this was a great entry point. I’d love to read more of his nonfiction, and am also curious to check out the limited series adaptation of this book. There’s lots more content out now covering these kind of fundamentalist cults than there was when the book originally came out. In particular, this called to mind the recent and very disturbing Netflix documentary Keep Sweet: Pray and Obey, which focuses on the rise of Warren Jeffs in the FLDS Church. The more stories from the inside that come out, I think the more society can name and shame the abusive power-trippers at the center of so many of these cults, which can only be a good thing in the long run.