Jon Krakauer's 'Under the Banner of Heaven'

Returning to Red Hill Books after finishing In Cold Blood, the friendly salesperson suggested Under the Banner of Heaven by Jon Krakauer to continue my true crime kick. Having read Into the Wild as a teen, I didn't know he wrote anything but adventure stories. Though, this was a case of two brothers who brutally murdered their sister-in-law and niece because they believed God told them to. The brothers were once Latter Day Saints until the became Mormon Fundamentalists. 

The book is framed around the above-mentioned crime, delving into the history of Mormonism in America. Before this book, the extent of my knowledge in Mormon history only went as deep as the US's struggle for the state of Utah and the argument of polygamy. That, and the little bit that's covered in the "Joseph Smith" episode of South Park. This history is fascinating, and Krakauer is thorough in illustrating the timeline so that it's clear how this history leads to the murder of a mother and daughter. 

While I trust that he's as truthful and unbiased as he can, I wonder if I am being as unbiased a reader as I can. I went into this not having a good opinion about Mormonism or most organized religions. I mean, Mormons wouldn't welcome black men (nevermind women of any race) into their priesthood again until 1978. That's kind of shitty, wouldn't you think? They're also largely homophobic. Shitty. 

But, despite the bloodiness of the Utah Mormons in mid-19th century (impersonating Shivwit tribesmen and murdering Gentile settlers), is American history on the whole so clean? Is current Americanism really that clean? 

I think it's important for Americans to know more about Mormonism and Mormon Fundamentalism, and from various points of view. I think it's important for us reading these histories to understand that it's all very complicated. 

In the grand scheme of things, is it really worth saying Mormons are worse/better than this group or that group? What it all comes down to is who the boss is, right? Right now, it's not Angela, and that's a problem. 

One of those interviewed is an excommunicated Fundamentalist Mormon named Deloy Batemen. He thinks that the Fundamental Mormons who grow up in remote, tight-knit communities "are probably happier, on the whole, than people on the outside." Makes sense, because if you never do go "outside," and are convinced that where you are and who you are is practically Heaven, you'd be pretty pleased. 

Though, he goes on to say that, "some things in life are more important than being happy. Like being free to think for yourself." 

Well, I agree with that, no matter who says it. 

Appendix: You might be interested in reading the LDS's critique of the book here. 

Also, you can see pics from one of the weirdest sites I've visited, in one of the nicest cities I've visited, Salt Lake City. If every city was as populated by as many conformity-and-obedience-obsessed people as SLC is, every city would probably be very nice. Then again, maybe it's better to thinking freely in stinky ol' San Francisco or gritty azz Pittsburgh. 

Have you read this book? What do you think? 

Are you Mormon or know Mormons? Feel free to express your opinion on the book!

Big Gay 10K!

Another race? Why, yes! I've been wanting to try a 10K since my first 5K in January. Now I have a chance, a fabulous chance! 

Check out this screen grab from my Big Gay 10K fundraising page. The September 15th race benefits the San Francisco Aids Foundation. As part of my participation, I'm attempting to collect at least $100 for the organization.

So far, I've got $10. See how easy? To donate, visit my page.

Stay tuned for updates!

Truman Capote's 'In Cold Blood'

Stopping by Red Hill Books, the neighborhood staple for the Bernal Heights bibliophile, I was on a mission to solve a mystery—what is out there for me to get lost in?

The store's true crime section is, unfortunately, only about three feet long and arranged at an unreachable height for everyone but Shaq. With my eyes straining to read the available titles, I wasn't sure where to even start. I thought about asking the helpful Red Hill Books staff, only both of them were in deep conversation with a customer over the validity (or lack thereof) of Dads Are the Original Hipsters. 

I didn't really want to read a Mystery, a paperback with a badly designed cover assaulting the eyes every time you pick it up, which is often as the covers would brag. And, I didn't want to risk making an unwise decision, like settling for Helter Skelter only to experience sleepless nights waiting for a troupe of murderers to surprise me.

After circling the store about eight times, I remembered! Mrs. Rutger's American Lit class, Junior year.  We had to pick an American-written novel and perform a creative presentation for a grade. I did A Farewell to Arms, heh. To one of the lesser enthusiastic of the students, my teacher suggested In Cold Blood because it was "violent." I totally recall her saying just that.

Well later, the student joked about how he only watched the movie. But, I always remembered the title as something I should read one day. I had read Capote's short story, "Breakfast at Tiffany's," so I couldn't fathom how he had written a "violent" true crime. During my wandering at Red Hill Books, I would find out! I finally located it in fiction, which was kind of annoying.

Very short synopsis—In 1959, rural Kansas, a town is shook up by the seemingly motiveless, bloody murders of a well-liked family. While touching on the investigation, the real focus is on the murderers themselves, their lives leading up the incident, their life right after.

Finishing it in only a few weeks (I'm a slow reader), I was lost in it. I expected it to read more like journalism, but it's skillfully written almost like fiction. Capote takes liberties with or enhancing the details of the "characters" lives. The way he illustrates Nancy Clutter chatting on the phone as a chipper teen girl would, the way Mrs. Clutter escapes the days away sleeping in her white socks and nightgown, the piggish eating habits of Dick and the root beer and aspirin Perry—all described in Capote's oddly spunky yet still shudder-inducing tone.

The only thing with this fiction-like journalism—or probably by definition, creative nonfiction—is that you, as the reader, should keep in mind that very term "creative nonfiction." Just like any piece of that genre, the author may take liberties, and not always to straight up deceive the reader, but to make a better story. Without getting into a debate on how much an author's truthfulness really matters in creative nonfiction, I just wanted to point out that this book is indeed creative nonfiction. Enjoy the story.

This isn't a "who-dunnit" mystery. While there are pointed fingers among the townsfolk, the reader knows exactly "who dunnit" less than twenty pages in. The mystery is the motive of the murder until that's actually solved. Then, the real mystery, the one that haunts the reader throughout the book, is finally addressed—Still, why did they do it? Once you understand their actual plan, and the failure in that plan, and more importantly who these men really are, you still wonder why they did it in the way that they did. I guess you can ask, What really makes a murderer?

Yes, I recommend it!

I had a wonderful journey with Truman Capote, tracking it down and reading it on the train to work and even on the beach in Santa Cruz (you know, just a little light reading on the shore). Currently, I am finishing up Under the Banner of Heaven by Jon Krakauer, as part of my true crime kick. I look forward to writing about that one, too!

Have you read In Cold Blood? What do you think?