Rating: 
Summary: First-rate
Review: A first-rate book, objectively written. The hysterical rants I've read against this book only further the point Krakauer is making about the nature of blind faith.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating
Review: As previous reviewers have pointed out, the low ratings on this page are from people offended with Krakauer's discussion of Mormon history and the case of the Lafferty brothers. Most of those offended are themselves Mormons.It is important to look at history--whether church, country or family history--with a critical eye. Krakauer isn't saying that the Mormon church is creating crazed killers, but he is saying that the Mormon church has dramatically changed it's religious tenets and views to accomodate better with American society and law. Mormonism is not unique in this respect, most Christian and other religions have changed somewhat to accomodate societal norms. This is why we have fundalmentalism; fundamentalists want to return to the way the religion originally used to be(or at least the way they perceive the way it was). Krakauer makes it clear that the Lafferty brothers were fringe and not the norm. But he does visit some interesting points (the court case against the Lafferty brothers originally raised these points) that religious belief and it's irrational thought is often close to other cases that psychiatrists have labeled mental disorders. I think that the further a religion strays from the norms of society, the more it gets labeled as crazy or cultish. It is interesting that religions do adapt to societal conditions to remain mainstream, especially since the "truths" they espouse are supposed be eternal and handed down from god. Krakauer discusses the Mormon church's history and uses a variety of sources, not just those critical of the Mormons. Mormonism is not unique in trying to cover up their not-so-benevolent history. Support for or being silent on slavery, facism, racism are part of the histories of most western (eastern religions are not free from repressive histories either) religons. And sexism, homophobia, racism and other repressive ideas still remain part of many current religious practice and doctorine.
Rating: 
Summary: UNDER THE BANNER OF HEARSAY
Review: How to proceed with this one? When a bad book is written it is difficult to be convincing to anyone about its badness. It boils down to an opinions spitting war. Hopefully that will not happen here. If you are interested in the lives and eccentricities of polygamists, their bizarre behavior and their propensity to violence in defending their beliefs then this book will offer some enlightenment. I read the book specifically to find out more about Dan Lafferty and the murder of his sister-in-law and niece. I wanted to read the interviews that Krakauer had had with Lafferty and to get a better understanding as to how such heinous crimes could be perpetrated against members of the Lafferty family--Dan's own extended family-- in the name of religion. The book was informative from that standpoint. But if you think that this book will give you the supposed inside story of the dark side of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) you are sadly mistaken. In the first place, none of the fundamentalists interviewed by Krakauer are members of the LDS Church. Since the late 1800's all individuals practicing polygamy and, more importantly, given to views and teachings that are inflammatory and contrary to those accepted by the LDS Church are summarily excommunicated. Moreover, Dan Lafferty--even in the Krakauer interviews--admits that he is not a member of the LDS Church and that his beliefs depart dramatically from anything the LDS Church teaches. In the second place, Krakauer's supposed research is riddled with references to the works of individuals like Fawn Brodie--an avowed nonobjective enemy of the LDS faith who wasted her life away writing unbelievable drivel about the Church's origins for decades. Mind you, she didn't stop with insubtantiable rubbish about Mormonism. She also wrote a landmark series of books about America's Founding Fathers that painted them as nothing more than a lecherous bunch of womanizers who just got lucky when it came to democracy. Brodie's reverse chauvinism is as transparent as water and the chip on her shoulder all too evident. If you are interested in historic facts regarding The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints read Leonard Arrington's excellent biography of Brigham Young, American Moses. It provides a fair narrative of many of the events included in Krakauer's book--information terribly twisted and misrepresented, I might add. If you want to read this book in order to look at radical religious fundamentalism, especially the tragic events centering on Dan Lafferty and his brother, Ron, then do so. But take Krakauer's supposed "facts" about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-days Saints as what they are--nothing more than mean-spirited, small-minded hearsay.
Rating:
Summary: Mormon loves Krakauer's book
Review: I read this book and absolutely loved it. It was complelling, thoughtful and well-researched. Oddly enough I was raised as a mainline Mormon. I was not offended by this book. I just loved it immenseley. I wish there were more Mormons who could read a work like this with maturity and wisdom. It poses many great questions that we all would do well to ask ourselves. I don't see Krakauer as attaking all religion. He's just providing a balance and even defending mainline Mormonism by saying that fundamentalism is not unique to Mormonism. Our college in Utah is trying to get Krakauer on campus. This is a great read. I recommend it to anyone. But read it with maturity. Everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and views. Even history.
Rating: 
Summary: Typical Mormon Bashing
Review: This is a very poorly written diatribe against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. The "author" has poorly researched the religion. He intermingles past events with recent events and does a very poor job of distinguishing various cults from the actual Mormon Church. This book is clearly biased. The last bastion of bias acceptable in our PC world is the caucasian, Christian, heterosexual male. If the author had written such a book about any other group, he would be branded a racist, sexist, genocidal Nazi. Do not believe this book. Just read the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants yourself.
Rating:
Summary: A response to the critics ...
Review: First of all, I found this book to be fscinating and would recommend it to anyone. As for those who gave it 1 or 2 stars, I found that virtually every one of the critics had one theme in common--they felt that Krakauer did an insufficient job of distinguishing between the Lafferty's and other Fundamentalist Saints and all of the "regular" LDS, such that readers could get the misleading impression the the Lafferty's and their ilk are representative of all 11 million LDS. Personally, I thought that Krakauer was perfectly clear on that point and it was always clear to me that the Fundamentalist group is a kind of fringe sect that does not represent the views of all the non-Fundamentalist Saints. However, even recognizing the distinction between the 2 groups, I had a different reason to be critical of the "regular" Saints, and that relates to Joseph Smith: It would seem that if he is the founder of the Church, its original President, Prophet, Seer, etc. etc., and obviously its most esteemed figure, then it would stand to reason that ALL Saints--and not merely the crackpot Fundamentalists--would have to treat both him and his beliefs with the utmost reverence and awe. However, Joseph Smith struck me as a sham, a fraud, a crackpot, a charlatan or whatever other synonym one may wish to call him. Indeed, it seems that his main attribute was his immense charisma and if we were an evil man (and I'm certainly not saying that he was), he could have just as easily the Hitler or the Osama Bin Laden of his day. He used his charisma for the same purpose that many charismatic people do, namely to cause large numbers of people to treat him as if he were practically a deity. I was particularly put off by the whole polygamy issue. While he may have chosen to cloak the whole thing in religious terms and to tell the world that he had received another "revelation" from God, it seems clear to me that a revelation from God had nothing to do with it. Rather, he was probably a horny young man who wanted to sleep with as many women (or, even better, young girls) as possible. Since he didn't want to have "affairs", he tells us that God "revealed" to him that he could sleep with all these women and girls and all he had to do was to marry them. Please!! This guy is the founder and "leader" of the LDS? As I see it, the reason I have a negative reaction to the "regular" Saints is not because I ever confused them with murderers or polygamists like the Lafferty's, but because I don't understand how they deal with the Joseph Smith issue. If they accept him and his teacings in all respects and treat him as a quasi-deity, then I would have no respect for them because I didn't have respect for Smith himself. On the other hand, if they don't accept him, then isn't that a flaw with the whole religion, i.e. when one doesn't accept the very person who founded your entire religion? The middle ground solution--i.e.--we accept some of his teachings, but not all, doesn't make much sense either. For example, it seems that the FLDS are absolutely correct in embracing polygamy to the extent that Smith embraced it himself. However the modern LDS tell us that they reject that part of Smith's teachings. And presumably, there are other parts that they reject as well. However it seems to me that if your religion is going to be based on, and founded by, a flesh and blood "God on Earth" like Smith, then his followers do not really have the right to simply "pick and choose" those portions of his teachings which they like and those which they don't. Either he was divinely inspired and was spoken to by God or he was not. One can't have it both ways. By contrast, I don't picture Christians as "selectively" adopting Christ's teachings.
Rating:
Summary: Mormo-Jihad in a word.
Review: People are scared of the trueh about the violebnce of religion. Jihad in a word. I have read this book several times over the past ten years, and referred back to it after reading biographies by others who often slander Ms. Brodies work. It is an excellent portrait of what Mr. Jefferson may have been like, both flattering and not so flattering, but always fascinating. I always enjoy it because it captures so many people around Jefferson so well, such as his mentor George Wythe and his father-in-law John Wayles, both who took a slave concubine after becoming widowers. This book is about relationships and their social times. Ms. Brodie weighed in on Jefferson being the father of Sally Hemming's children when it was not popular to taint him with human emotions. She would be proved right on at least one of Ms. Hemming's children, Eston, being fathered by the same Y chromosome that Jefferson's own father carried. Unfortunately Ms. Brodie did not live to see the scientific vindication of her research and insight. The Jefferson family has long claimed that Sally's children who favored Jefferson were fathered by nephew Samuel Carr, Jefferson's sister Martha's son. But Sam couldn't pass that Jefferson Y chromosome! This book is a must read for everyone who is interested in understanding the Sage of Montecello. It makes the world of Jefferson come to life and allow the reader to walk in the times of his day, his friendships, enemies, depressions, joys, trials, and triumphs. Brodie takes the time to richly describe the other individuals in Jefferson's life, there by providing to the reader great scholarship that is immensely personal and interesting. No single book can capture Jefferson's philosophy and accomplishments; but this book is a must read for a study of the personality of one of the most complex and interesting men in the history of our civilization. It is the most fun book on Jefferson and his times that one can read.
Rating: 
Summary: American Fundamentalism
Review: Framed around the vicious murders of 2 people in 1984, Krakauer examines the history of both Mormonism and its many splintered fundamentalist offshoots. He covers familiar ground in the early history of Joseph Smith's founding of the religion, and the trek by Brigham Young to Utah when the Mormon's hoped to settle in an area free from the interference of the Federal government. Less well known incidents include the Mountain Meadow massacre, where an entire wagon train of 'gentile' settlers was wiped out on orders of Brigham Young. He jumps back and forth, a technique which works when showing how the revelation filled delusions of 2 brothers who planned the murders derives from Mormon traditions; but the technique is more jarring when discussing current travels and histories of the polygamist heterodox sects of fundamentalist Mormonism. The most upsetting portions of the book are not the murder or trial sections, but the descriptions of the psychological and cultural pressures that prevent women from rejecting the demands of husbands and fathers that result in polygamy and incest.
Rating:
Summary: At least he was kind enough to confess his bias - in the end
Review: Krakauer so masterfully intertwines fact with fiction that it is impossible to distinguish one from the other unless you posess a substantial background with which to decode his effort. He attempts to explore certain religions from the perspective of those who engage in abborrant behaviour not espoused by any religion he investigates. In the final few paragraphs Krakauer finally confesses what has already becomes dissapointingly, painfully obvious - he has no understanding of the concept about which he is writing - people of faith - any faith.
Rating:
Summary: Controversial and thought-provoking
Review: In "Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith", author Jon Krakauer writes about the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints ("LDS Church"), Mormon Fundamentalism, and especially about Dan and Ron Lafferty. Dan and Ron Lafferty are two fundamentalist Mormons who cruelly murdered a young mother and her infant daughter, under the influence of real or imagined malevolent supernatural guidance. Krakauer writes well, and the book moves quickly. The author carefully researched the Laffertys and Mormon Fundamentalism. On those subjects, Krakauer relies on interviews with present and former Mormon fundamentalists and Dan Lafferty himself. Krakauer also studied transcripts of the criminal proceedings against the Laffertys. The author's history of the LDS Church has provoked controversy. I am previously familiar with LDS Church history only in outline, so I can't vouch for Krakauer's complete accuracy about that (acknowledging, of course, that complete confidence in historical conclusions is always perilous). However, the author takes apparent pains to be fair and balanced. For example, when he discusses historical atrocities committed by members of the LDS Church, he puts them in context of atrocities perpetrated against the LDS Church. When he discusses the supernatural inspiration of LDS Church founder Joseph Smith, he does so without irony or condescension. Krakauer discusses facts surrounding the origin of the LDS Church that outsiders might find peculiar and disturbing, but he also acknowledges the widely held opinion, which he shares, that Mormons themselves are fine and decent people. Members of the LDS Church might not like or agree with some of what Krakauer writes, but he has not written with a venal spirit. Far from it. Yet to say that the author took pains to be fair is not to say he is unbiased. In the last chapter of his book, Krakauer explains that he set out to write a book about the nature of religious belief. He ended up writing about the murderous Lafferty brothers. Brilliant author and fervent Christian G.K. Chesterton wrote about the venerated Saint Francis of Assisi, but Krakauer writes about men one can only despise. The subject selection reveals the bias. To be fair to Mr. Krakauer, he states that his work-in-progress detoured from the project he originally conceived. However, the final product is what it is. No one would expect a book that showcases notorious religious criminals to portray religion in a favorable light, and, indeed, it does not. Other reviewers have pointed out places where the author's anti-religious bias is explicit. In its broader implications, this book will be red meat for religious skeptics. It will be thought provoking, even challenging, to person who are comfortable in their religious skin, and they might be deeper for having read it. To persons of delicate religious sensibilities, it will be a 358 page justification for bringing back book burnings, unless they possess Mormon-bashing proclivities that blind them to the broader implications of the book.
| 
