Rating: 
Summary: Great book; analysis of 1-star reviews
Review: This is an excellent book. Very interesting and fascinating. Krakauer shows how the institution of polygamy, as honored by the early mainline LDS, and modern-day Mormon Fundamentalists, lead, and continues to lead, to violence. This is not surprising, considering the outlaw status of polygamy, and that illegal behavior begets more illegal behavior, including violence (this is true regardless of whether the original illegal behavior - in this case polygamy - is immoral).I can't add much to what the other 4-star and 5-star reviewers have already said. But I was surprised at the number of 1-star reviews of this book, and so I took a close look at them. I thought it might be helpful to others to share the results of my analysis. You can read them too by choosing to see all reviews, and then selecting 1-star reviews only. As of January 28, 2004, when I'm doing this analysis, there are a total of 37 1-star reviews, of which 24 are from unique reviewers. One reviewer, rcbarden, posted four 1-star reviews. Ten other reviewers each posted two 1-star reviews, most of which are verbatim duplicates. Of the 24 1-star reviewers, 16 (67%) admit or reveal membership or affinity towards the LDS, yet 17 of the 1-star reviews (46%) criticize Krakauer himself for not being objective or being biased against the LDS. It's interesting to note how the 1-star reviews mostly tend to show up at the same time. The first batch of 7 (19%) showed up in the latter half of July 2003. The second batch was bigger, 20 (54%), all showing up in the latter half of August 2003 and the first week of September. Then there were 2 more later in September, a handful in October, none in November, one in December, and 2 (so far) in January 2004. In other words, about 75% of the 1-star reviews all showed up within two 2-week periods last summer. Coincidence? As to the content of the 1-star reviews - there is not much there. Very few of them actually cite anything specific about the book in their critiques, leaving one to wonder whether any of them actually read the book. They are full of claims of "bias", "Propoganda" (sic), "attack", "bigotry", "incompetence", etc., most without any substantiation. A common misconception shared by several of these reviews is perhaps best captured in one that urges, "don't judge all mormons by one idiot!" Who is the one idiot? Dan Lafferty? What about all the other idiots to which we are introduced by Krakauer? More importantly, Krakauer doesn't make any conclusion about "all mormons", explicitly or implicitly. He does not blame Mormonism or religion per se for Dan Lafferty's actions. By telling the tale, he does show how the practice of polygamy, to the extent it is endorsed, is necessarily connected to violence (Krakauer doesn't even get into the why aspect of this, which I believe is simply due to its illegality). But a couple of the 1-star reviews are actually worth reading. In particular, seefilm's review at least has some specific complaints. Seefilm quotes Krakauer stating that to understand [some infamous Mormon Fundamentalists] you have to begin with Joseph Smith, and then compares this to saying that to understand Catholicism today you need to study the atrocities of the Crusades. But that's not right. Krakauer is not saying you need to study the Mormon fringes in order to understand Mormonism - he's saying you need to understand the origins of Mormonism - that fundamentalists claim to follow, fundamentally - in order to understand the fundamentalists. And then he proceeds to do so, quite convincingly I might add. Another reviewer, Brooks G, takes issue with some specific details in the book, like whether modern day Mormons refer to non-Mormons as "gentiles". If I remember correctly, Krakauer was talking about fundamentalist Mormons, not mainstream Mormons. And isn't this nitpicking anyway? His other nits are similarly inconsequential, even if true. An anonymous reviewer from Edmonds, WA quotes from a review by Terryl Givens. Givens claims that examining Laffertys beliefs in order to understand the nature of their violence is akin to studying Judaism in order to understand David Berkowitz ("Son of Sam"). Well, if Berkowitz claimed his actions were moral and he was acting in accordance to Judaism then indeed that would be appropriate. A better example is to see how understanding the violence of Muslim terrorists is related to Islam teachings. And, again, Krakauer does NOT _blame_ Mormonism for Lafferty's action as this review claims. Some of the reviewers, like the anonymous "reader from American Fork, Utah", take issue with Krakauer trying "to make us think that Joseph Smith and Ron Lafferty are cut from the same cloth." Well, they both claimed that God made direct revelations to them, and they both were proponents of polygamy. Same cloth? I don't know. But Krakauer certainly doesn't "make us think" either way, clearly leaving it up to the reader to reach his or her own conclusion. The review closes with the following unsupported conclusion: "this book appears to be nothing more than yet another attempt to profit from bigots and the weak minded, while poisoning countless minds against being open to a religion that has done immeasurable good ...". I, for one, strongly disagree. The fact that these Mormons take such a view of this book is interesting, however. Perhaps it's hitting closer to home for them than a non-Mormon like myself would otherwise think. In summary, the 1-star reviewers that claim Krakauer's bias weakens his credibility should all take a good long look in the mirror. This is an excellent book, and I strongly recommend it to anyone with even a modicum of interest in U.S. history, "the West", religion, Mormon history, Lees' Ferry, the Powell expedition of the Grand Canyon, fanaticism, human nature, polygamy, true crime, the Arizona "strip", and particularly how all these topics might be connected.
Rating: 
Summary: The man has an agenda...
Review: He claims to be objective, but I (a long inactive Mormon, and able to be quite critical of the church) found an implied equation between the extremists he focused on and the larger LDS institution as a whole. I rate it P for Propaganda. Better views into LDS life and culture are available.
Rating:
Summary: Latter Day Cult
Review: Bravo Jon Krakauer for your latest effort - a worthy, educational and entertaining read, although scary in it's implications. I'm going to keep a couple copies on hand for those brainwashed youth who on occasion knock at my door. As much as I enjoyed the book, the one star reviews were equally entertaining.
Rating:
Summary: I found it engrossing and disturbing at the same time.
Review: I finished "Under the Banner of Heaven" today and I still can't take my mind off of what I read. Let me start by saying I can clearly see why faithful Mormons might find this book offensive, but I think ANY book about religion is going to provoke STRONG reactions from the readers. I do also wonder though if Mormons who don't like the book maybe don't like their religion's blood atonement history as well as other not-so-nice aspects of the early Church discussed so openly. Also, I can see how people very familiar with Mormonism might find the book a little dull. Krakauer states in the book (albeit at the end) his belief system, which can best be described as agnostic. He also explains that he grew up intimately associated with Mormons; they were his friends, teachers, coaches and he was always fascinated with the way they lived their lives. He wanted to explore the history of this religion, which was founded in the day of recorded history and explore how it took root and brought itself where it stands today: extremely schismatic. What I found interesting about this book was not only the story of the Lafferty family, but the complex organizational structure of the church, along with the divisions of the mainstread LDS church and the fundamentalist offshoot churches. Personally, I felt that Krakauer was very objective and not at all "out to get" the Mormon Church. He is at his best with his efficient, engrossing storytelling that he's known for. I found this book was a fast read and just when the reader starts to get confused with all the complicated family trees in the polygamous sects, he switches the story to either an interview with a Mormon person or family, or switches the story back to what happened to Brenda and Erica Lafferty. I was disappointed that he didn't tell of where the Lafferty family is today as well as what happened in terms of the fallout among the people who KNEW about the removal revelation but CHOSE not to tell anyone about it or make any attempt to stop it. For instance, where is Alan Lafferty today and why did he not tell his wife her life was in danger, and why did Alan's mother (as well as the members of the prophet school) not tell anyone? Were they ever charged as accessories to murder and if not, why? I suppose the Lafferty family might not be in the mood for interviews. These things would have just helped explain things in my mind, though these things may never be able to be explained to my satisfaction. In terms of dealing with the history of the Mormon church, what I took from this book is that there has been great stides within the early church to actively portray the church in a certain favorable light. I can see why faithful Mormons would profusely disagree with the notion that Joseph Smith frequented brothels; but vehement denial by Mormons doesn't mean it didn't possibly happen. What I found disturbing, yet comical, is the paradox that teaching that each individual can receive revelations from God directly then leads to conflicting messages among those individuals. It seems to become a "my revelation is better than your revelation" and sort of a childish "na-aah" "ya-haa". It seems God gives everyone mentioned personal revelations that only benefit themselves. I also found it very interesting that Krakauer draws the reader to realize that the fundamentalists "correctly" feel they are more in tune with the original Mormon Church, because it does seem they are. I also found it interesting that the polygamy edict was never revoked... just postponed. I wonder if the modern day Church will ever address this issue. It seems as the Mormon church continues to grow, they will continue to suffer from identity issues. In trying to explain the Mormon church's evolution, it is very clear that the Church is defining itself as it goes along. There are now several offshoot churches of offshoot churches of offshoot churches. It almost seems as if these smaller independent versions of the Mormon church will implode upon themselves. I think there are a lot of valid, necessary, and probably awkward issues for Mormons to discuss among themselves and explain to the "gentiles" in this book. Krakauer deals mostly with the fundamentalist churches in this book, and so I believe any reader who takes this book on as a read will clearly understand that what is discussed in this book is not a judgement of Mormons, but rather what is it about this religion that gives birth to so many fanatics within it. I recommend it.
Rating:
Summary: Very interesting read
Review: I knew almost nothing about the Mormon faith (fundamentalist or otherwise) before reading this book, and I think Mormons should thank the author for going to great lengths to distinguish between mainline Mormons and those on the fringe. I can now speak up and defend the majority of Mormons when I hear people bad-mouthing them in relation to incidents such as the Elizabeth Smart kidnapping. I must say I find it very easy to dismiss many of the negative reviews of this book because while they rant away about all the errors in the book, they don't specifically state what those errors are. So they end up sounding like folks who haven't even read the book, if they can't cite exactly what's wrong in it. If you want to convince people that the author is mistaken, you have to point out the mistakes and state what the correct information is. Since the reviews I read couldn't do that, I lean strongly toward believing the facts as presented.
Rating: 
Summary: Ex-Mormon's take on "Under the Banner of Heaven"
Review: I found Krakauer's book gripping and horrific. First, I will say that I was an active Mormon from childhood until middle age. I resigned from the church, not because it had cast off its original doctrines, but because its 'disowned' esoteric doctrines (and the Book of Mormon itself) are fallacious. Regarding the 'secret' doctrines of plural marriage and 'blood atonement', all of us who were inquisitive and literate could in the past research and even discuss the subjects. It was common knowledge amongst many of us that there had been 'hits' of church enemies during the 1800s. Nowadays this history has been disavowed, if not openly then by silence. And authors like Krakauer will usually receive the 'silent' treatment from any church spokesmen. If a journalist or author takes the smallest issue with church history, showing the church in a less-than attractive light, it is the author that takes the heat, NOT the issue. Understanding the LDS church requires an understanding of their history and their original doctrine. Krakauer would be unique if he did not receive the usual ad hominem cold shoulder...or given the heave-ho as an atheist, liberal or gay with an axe to grind.
Rating:
Summary: Polygamy, Fundamentalists, and the Mormon Church
Review: Well-known author Jon Krakauer (Into Thin Air, Into the Wild) originally wanted to write a book titled History and Belief that would focus "on the uneasy, highly charged relationship between the LDS Church and its past." In this not-yet-written book, he planned to see "how does a critical mind reconcile scientific and historical truth with religious doctrine? How does one sustain belief when confronted with facts that appear to refute it?" Instead of writing this book, though, Krakauer's research led him to write about the dual July 24, 1984 murders committed by the infamous Lafferty brothers (Ron and Dan) in American Fork, Utah. The story told in Under the Banner of Heaven (paperback comes out July 2004) is both intriguing and revealing. In fact, Krakauer makes it very evident that the Laffertys not only held fast to Mormon fundamentalism and a deep-seeded belief in polygamy, but they were also closely aligned with the thinking of numerous early Mormon leaders, especially Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, the first two LDS prophets. Krakauer opens the book by giving background information on the night when the actual murders that occurred. Ron and Dan brutally ambushed their younger brother Allan's infant daughter and his wife, Brenda, whom they blamed for causing Ron's wife to leave for Florida. The murders are not exactly described until the latter part of the book, but it should be understood that graphic details are given...and it's not a pretty sight. However, this is more than just a tale centering on the Laffertys. Throughout the book, as the account is unfurled describing how the Laffertys got to the point of cold-blooded murder and thinking their actions were God-ordained, Krakauer weaves in the basic history of the LDS Church, starting with LDS founder Joseph Smith in chapter 5. Events such as Carthage, Mountain Meadow (he points out that only later was it called "Meadows"), and the Manifesto are detailed. Krakauer intersperses the historical aspects of Mormonism with the different interpretations of this religion as explained by numerous leaders. Since many fundamentalists place special emphasis on polygamy, Krakauer highlights the more well-known polygamous individuals such as LeRoy Johnson, Brian David Mitchell (who kidnapped Elizabeth Smart), Tom Green, and the LeBarons. Displayed are the many problems associated with polygamy including incest, spousal abuse, septuagenarians marrying teenagers, and the stealing from the government. Although the general history is accurate and can be easily supported, this book is not meant to be a historical work. In fact, Krakauer utilizes other researchers such as Fawn Brodie (No Man Knows My History), Will Bagley (Blood of the Prophets), and D. Michael Quinn. Thus, anyone hoping for new historical nuggets may be disappointed (though I did learn a few new things). Truly this book is tailor-made for the person who doesn't have a deep understanding of Mormonism's roots. One thing that Krakauer does not provide is the in-text citations of his sources. Instead, he merely uses asterisks and provides the footnoted information at the bottom of the page. No resource/page number addresses are provided, meaning that the reader has to take the author's word for it. While there may be a place for these kinds of books, this type of documentation drives researchers who thrive on specific source/page information crazy. At the same time, Krakauer makes some very astute observations that show how he understands the many inconsistencies in Joseph Smith's philosophical system. Under the Banner of Heaven, which hit the presses in July 2003, has infuriated many Mormons who consider this tome as an affront to their faith. After all, how dare the author insinuate that these Mormon Fundamentalists are even faintly related to the only true church on earth, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints! Yet this thinking is quite flawed. As the author insinuates, if Smith and Young were to return to the earth today, certainly they would recognize the Fundamentalist churches as being more authentic than the LDS Church and its structure. Why should we think so poorly of these modern-day polygamists when their attitude is certainly shared by those who guided the church in the early years? He has a point, though Mormons have flooded the Internet with their ranting protests. For instance, many of the more than 300+ reviews of this book on Amazon.com are LDS critics complaining that Krakauer is somehow anti-Mormon and therefore must have a vendetta against the Church. Thus, many of these reviewers give the book a "one star" rating and display their ignorance with archaic reviews, which clearly show they never read the book. This proves that there are many Mormons who are more concerned with their religion's public relations image rather than history or, egad, the truth. While Krakauer is an agnostic/atheist and is certainly no friend to Christianity, I believe that he holds no bigoted bent against the LDS Church. Overall, I recommend this book, especially for those who would like to better understand the polygamist mindset that can be found throughout the western United States. Since I personally know polygamists from Utah, I commend Krakauer for accurately displaying the mentality that characterizes many of these sincere folk (i.e. "it's us against the world"). The only caution I would give is that the book is quite graphic when it comes to the description of the murders and the language used by the Lafferty boys. Finally, though I certainly disagree with Krakauer on theology, I would like to encourage Krakauer to pursue the book he originally set out to write. Of course, Mormons will once again color him with that dirty "anti-Mormon" label, but I for one would be an interested observer should he ever complete that book.
Rating:
Summary: Something different from Krakauer, but no less compelling.
Review: I read this book as a Krakauer fan, rather than as a person with a particular interest in true crime or religion. Though very different from "Into the Wild" or "Into Thin Air," this book was no less compelling. I have read reviews claiming this book is too critical of Mormons (quite a few of those, unsurprisingly) and some that he is too sympathetic to fringe elements. As another reviewer here mentioned, any time the subject of religion is even broached, much less explored in some depth, people are gonna holler. But this book doesn't defame anyone, nor is it worship. The people who direct potential readers to books which sing the praises of LDS/Joseph Smith are probably mistaken as to who is interested in this book in the first place. While I don't think any LDS member should be offended by this book, it clearly is written for non-LDS members, particularly the large segment of the public with very little knowledge of the church beyond the door-knocking "elders" with whom we've all had contact. I learned a lot about the LDS church,its origins, the radical fringe, the murders, and even Elizabeth Smart. If you are looking for adventure or crime, this will disappoint you. However, a reader in search of a provocative, extremely well-written and interesting work of nonfiction will be satisfied.
Rating:
Summary: Flawed, but an interesting read
Review: Being both a fan of Jon Krakauer's climbing-related writings and a fifth-generation member of the LDS Church, I made a point of reading Under the Banner of Heaven. I found the book to be both earnest and thought-provoking, though not without flaws. Krakauer succeeds in posing a question that will not have occurred to very many Mormons: Who is closer to observing the religion propounded by Joseph Smith, and fostered by Brigham Young, in the 19th Century--the "mainline" (Krakauer's word) LDS Church, or the various polygamy-centered sects that view the Church as having deviated from the pure faith? In other words, were such things as polygamy, blood atonement (the notion of killing a "sinner," generally involuntarily and without due process of law, in order to save his soul or further God's purposes, which is still a topic of controversy), and the barring of blacks from the priesthood so integral to the tenets of Mormonism that no one who doesn't espouse them today can be viewed as a faithful follower? Given my membership in the "mainline" church, and modern insight into the hatefulness of those particular practices/policies, I think I know the answer, but one cannot fault someone of Krakauer's background for having doubts. Still, I feel compelled to make observations about what I regard as flaws. First and foremost, Krakauer relies much too heavily on Fawn Brodie's No Man Knows My History as the definitive source of information about Joseph Smith. No matter how accurate the book may or may not be in fact, an objective reader must account for Brodie's obvious bias and defamatory intent before deciding how much credence to lend to it. In short, Brodie is no more the last word on Joseph Smith than is Roland Huntford's The Last Place On Earth regarding the character and exploits of Robert Falcon Scott. Krakauer, however, has bought heavily into the outlandish conclusions of both books, which are landmark exercises in interpreting the historical record entirely in light of predetermined conclusions. (True, the LDS Church tends to do the same thing in its airbrushed accounts of Joseph's life, but I wouldn't expect Krakauer to accept them without question, either.) Second, despite Krakauer's close associations through the years with LDS Church members, he chooses not to convey just how far off the radar the beliefs and actions of Ron and Dan Lafferty are relative to the average Mormon's frame of reference. If Ron Lafferty's "removal revelation"--his rationalization for murdering his sister-in-law and infant niece--was disavowed by the polygamist loons with whom he and his brothers studied, try to imagine how repugnant it would have been to any of the clear-thinking Mormons Krakauer has known in his lifetime! The Laffertys were/are nutcases, pure and simple, and any implicit attempt to tar all Mormons with the same broad brush is patently unfair. Finally, Krakauer is more than a little narrow-minded when he concludes that religious beliefs tend to lead people to do odd things. Does it really have to pointed out to him that "irrational" beliefs in ideas or people extend much farther than the realm of religion--or that people can, and do, espouse and defend such beliefs with as much fervor as any Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist? Who can rationalize, for example, organized feminists' dogged defense of partial-birth abortion, notwithstanding the procedure's moral and medical indefensibility? (I haven't yet heard of an abortion-rights advocate's killing, say, a pro-life politician, but I've heard enough angry statements from the pro-choice side, wishing death on their political opponents, to realize that it's plausible.) Moreover, political movements have their own cults of personality, the one accreting around Bill Clinton being just one example. When Clinton came under attack in the Monica Lewinsky affair, his acolytes were at least as blinkered in their defense of him as modern Mormons are in their defense of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. To associate these sorts of phenomena entirely with religious beliefs is simply wrong-headed.
Rating: 
Summary: Good story, But Krakauer is no Historian
Review: Krakauer's book, like his bestseller "Into Thin Air," is a wonderfully written story. He can string words together - make no doubt about it. However where his book comes apart is in his research. The historical claims he makes in his book are not taken from a balanced library of sources. He focuses primarily on excommunitcated Mormon historians, although he does bring in some active Mormon research, primarily from Mr. Bushman. I can only belive that Mr. Krakauer himself was aware of the sources he was taking his information from, because his book contains only a bibliography and a simple chapter by chapter acknowledgment of what books were used for each chapter. The author does not endnote or footnote any of his claims. To me this raises the concern that he focused too much on historians Brodie and Quinn, whom he references throughout the book as being the quinessential Mormon historians, despite the fact that they were both excommunicated, a fact which further raises questions of their intents and desires in writing their histories. One example of Krakauers' poor scholarship is shown when he pronounces Mark E. Peterson as the President of the LDS church, when in fact Mr. Peterson was a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Further, he asserts with boldness the sexual proclivities of Joseph Smith (more than likely drawn from Ms. Brodie's book) without acknowledging that such assertions are not broadly accepted or supported by practicing LDS church members. He does not even cite as a source for his book LDS scholar Hugh Nibley's "No Ma'am, That's Not History," a treatise which calls into question much of Ms. Brodie's scholarship. Mr. Krakauer's book works as a story - but there is too much missing or added to discount it entirely as an accurate historical work. Although he may not have intended to write a "history" of Mormons, it is in fact what he did - but he did it based on unbalanced research, which results in a book that is not clear or correct.
|
