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!