Barely a Book Club

Teetering on the edge of a normal book club

UtBoH – Part 2 February 12, 2008

Filed under: Under the Banner of Heaven — antof9 @ 11:38 am

Either this book is an easy read or it’s just that interesting, but I’m flying through it. I really like Jon Krakauer as an author. He has an easy-flowing style of writing. In some of the other posts we had discussed that it does seem that all the extra Mormon history is a little superflous to the story though.

While I’m reading I’m trying to make a conscious effort to separate the “characters” in this book from regular everyday Mormons. The last thing I want to do is lump everyone into the same Fundamentalist bucket. At the same time I’m trying to understand why these men felt they had the right to treat others they way they do.

Read to Chapter 16. I’m not sure if there will be a meeting this week. Me and Misc are out of town and so is IL. Please post if you would like to meet.


14 Responses to “UtBoH – Part 2”

  1. LOL — I think Kelly already said she wasn’t reading this one, so is it just me?

    If so, I’m ok not meeting, since I haven’t bought the book yet and I have like 6 things I need to finish right now.

    If anyone DOES want to meet, I will!

  2. Kelly Says:

    I’m not opposed to sleeping in and doing nothing.

  3. Kylle Says:

    Is anyone else totally appauled that like a dozen people knew that these men had a list of people to kill and they said NOTHING. What were they thinking. They were just counting on them being to lazy to get it done? Those people should have been tried as accomplices.

    Also it stange to me that people that were so adamant about there faith still indulged in non-approved things. Dan admits to drinking alcohol and smoking pot. This definately points to the fact that they only chose to obey the rules that best served them. Sickening.

  4. Antof9 Says:

    Finally got my copy today. WHO suggested this one?!

    I’d like to go on record with a book suggestion for the next time we’re compiling our reading list. Remember when the BBC started, and we all wanted to read “the books we hadn’t read yet”? I’d love to incorporate a few more classics into our future lists, if possible

  5. Antof9 Says:

    am in the middle of chapter 12 now, and not quite as upset as I was when I read the beginning of this book. It’s now become a fascinating study in mormonism. You’re right, Kylle — it does read pretty quickly.

    I also learned a new word “autodidact”. hmmm …

  6. Also, if anyone hasn’t purchased their copy of The Historian yet, let me know — I have 2 🙂

  7. Inspector Luv Says:

    I don’t have an issue with reading classics, but with restrictions. I don’t want to only read Jane Austin and I’ve read a lot of Shakespeare. Maybe we shouldn’t vote on books since it seems to weed out a lot of the classics that are nominated… maybe everyone should pick a book and we’ll have to suffer the consequences of other people’s bad choices. 😉 Or, we can just have each person pick a classic on a rotating basis… I don’t know that many classics have actually been nominated recently besides the Jane Austin one that we decided to read.

  8. LOL! I’m happy with Emma on the current list and don’t need Shakespeare or Austen to be the only ones on the list.

    Maybe the term “classics” is too specific — it just seems that when we talk books, there is always a list of books that some of us missed if our specific English classes hadn’t covered them. My own personal list?
    Brothers Karamazov
    Of Mice and Men
    Huckleberry Finn
    Great Expectations
    A Tale of Two Cities
    Uncle Tom’s Cabin
    King Lear or Othello (well, we could add *1* Shakespeare…)
    Les Miserables
    The Age of Innocence
    The Republic
    Robinson Crusoe (?)
    Gulag Archipelago
    The Art of War (?)

    There are more, but …

  9. shanda Says:

    Who are these people who only want to read Jane Austen? 🙂

    I’m proud to say that my BA in English has served me well & I’ve read almost all of Margaret’s list…and would be happy to read any or all again.

    I like the idea of having each member pick one book for the next round of reading & forgo the voting for those. It might at least be worth a try.

  10. Kylle Says:

    It’s always my goal to throw in a couple of classics when I add my nominations…in fact I do it on purpose because no one usually nominates classics.

    My definition of “classics” are any books that appeared on the back of my “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” Cliff Notes. Because I figure if they had to make Cliff Notes it’s a relevant book.

    And Ant immediately put down any book you are reading and read Great Expectations…I’ll loan you my copy. It is one of my all time favorite books. And either before or after watch the Great Expectations movie with Anthony Hopkins because it’s really close to the book and the actors really make the characters come alive.

  11. Inspector Luv Says:

    Shanda- the only reason I mentioned Jane Austen is one of her books always appears on the list… usually the only classic.

    Brothers Karamazov- read, no desire to read again
    Of Mice and Men- never read, but would like to read
    Huckleberry Finn-read multiple times
    Great Expectations- read, don’t make me read this again!
    A Tale of Two Cities- never read
    Uncle Tom’s Cabin- never read, would like to read
    King Lear or Othello (well, we could add *1* Shakespeare…)- read… I vote for a lesser known Shakespeare play
    Les Miserables-read, once is enough
    The Age of Innocence-read to death
    The Republic- never read
    Robinson Crusoe (?)- never read
    Gulag Archipelago- huh?
    The Art of War (?)- never read

  12. Antof9 Says:

    Back to the discussion of the book — I think it was in the previous blog entry comments that a couple people commented on the mormon history part of the book as opposed to the story of the Lafferty murders. I’ve finished it, and have lots to talk about. but on that topic in particular, I think he’s missed his mark. The book isn’t about the murders at all, but rather a (mostly interesting) history of mormonism. Do you think the publisher decided to spin it as a story of the murders to garner more readers? Be more sensationalistic? I would never compare it to “In Cold Blood” (as The San Fran Chronicle does on the cover of my copy) — it’s hardly an in-depth study of the crime or the characters involved as that was. As a history/study of Mormonism, with attendant stories throughout, I found it fascinating. Why try to make it “about” the Lafferty murders, which frankly i didn’t want to read about anyway?

    Thoughts? Save them for Saturday?

  13. Antof9 Says:

    re: the classics — what I meant has been taken more literally than principle-y. I’d just like to read less stuff like UtBoH and more stuff like something you’d see on a classics list. That’s just personal preference, and I’m not saying I’m unwilling to read books like UtBoH… I was just reminded (as I was disturbed by the first few chapters of this one) that I wanted to be in a book club to expand my repertoire of classics, and I realized that hadn’t much happened in recent months, so I wanted to throw it out there as a suggestion to see if others might feel the same way.

    f’rinstance, I just read “Wuthering Heights” by myself. This seems to have been a staple of many educations but wasn’t mine. From the entertaining Friends episode when Phoebe and Rachel discuss it to some people declaring it one of the greatest love stories of all time, it’s the kind of book I’d have liked to have read with others, if for no other reason than for someone to try to convince me what’s “love story” about it. I started a thread on it at BookCrossing because I so badly wanted to talk about it:

    Hope that makes sense …

  14. Inspector Luv Says:

    New Mexico has not been kind to me so I’m a little out of it. Is anyone opposed to each of us taking turns picking an “education staple” we haven’t read, but would like to read? I think that resolves the issue. Whether it’s UtBoh or something else, there are always going to be books that we don’t like. However, this is clearly a book that will bring up discussion, which I think is the point of a book club… I didn’t join a book club to read the classics or any other “type” of book. I joined the book club so I could meet people who like to read and discuss books. I already read UtBoh and I prefer to read books that I haven’t read, but people voted for these books so I accept that as part of the process of selecting books. Other book clubs have each member choose a book instead of voting. I think it’s all a crap shoot.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s