I just cannot finish this book!

[Teaching3bears]

Under the Banner of Heaven by Jon Krakauer.  It’s just a true story of horrible people doing horrible things and it’s making me depressed about humanity.  I thought I would learn something about human beings and religion from it.  I’m only in page 41 but I am not learning anything enlightening.  I skimmed forward but did not see anything positive.  I knew nothing about Mormon fundamentalists or Mormons in general before this so I thought I would be exposed to something new.  Should I continue this book?  I am usually a person who finishes what I start.  

[fairfarmhand]

My opinion is that life is too short to finish books that make you feel crappy. Or are boring. Or stupid. Dump anything that is depressing or saddening. 

[knitgrl]

Nancy Pearl, a famous librarian said,

“If you're 50 years old or younger, give every book about 50 pages before you decide to commit yourself to reading it, or give it up.

If you're over 50, which is when time gets shorter, subtract your age from 100 - the result is the number of pages you should read before deciding whether or not to quit. If you're 100 or over you get to judge the book by its cover, despite the dangers in doing so.”

[forty-two]

You got further than I did - I don't think I made it out of the intro.  I picked it up because I liked Krakauer's Everest book (Into Thin Air), and I too thought I could learn something about human beings and religion from it.  But it did not click with me and I put it down. 

WRT FLDS, I found "Escape", by Carolyn Jessop and Laura Palmer, to be interesting and informative.  WRT learning about human beings and religion from studying extreme groups, Jeff Guinn's "Waco" and "Road to Jonestown" are *excellent*.  (I had to stop reading his "Manson", because though it was a very well-done book, I decided midway through I just didn't *want* to understand Manson any further.)

[MercyA]

Chuck it without guilt. Life is too short. 🙂 

[Katy]

Phil 4:8- 

Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.

There. Now you have Biblical justification to chuck it. 
 

Sometimes when I’m frustrated with a book I google it & read a few reviews with spoilers before I decide to chuck it. Life’s too short and there’s too much else to read to be frustrated with what should be a pleasure. 

[Kassia]

Another vote for life is too short and move on to something else.  I still struggle with this until I remember that I have more books that I want to read than I'll be able to finish in my lifetime so why waste time on one I don't like.  

[Ottakee]

Nope……and any book that is too deep, triggering, or just depressing can be stopped at any time.

Another time might be the right season for that book….or maybe never, either way, no guilt.

[dirty ethel rackham]

Another vote for "Nope."  Let it go.  I didn't read this book (I usually like Krakauer's writings.)  But I did watch the mini-series on Hulu and it was fantastic (yes, still dark and depressing, but I found it more tolerable as a series than as a book.)

[Lecka]

I have only read “Into the Wild,” and it’s an emotionally tough book.  
 

I actively don’t read emotionally tough books at times when it would not be good for my own mental/emotional state.  
 

I would actively decide not to read a book that was upsetting me.  
 

I can either choose not to read it, or choose to take a break and read it at another time in my life.  
 

Into the Wild has some parts that have stayed with me, I can see this author being that way.  
 

I would not read Into the Wild if I were in any kind of emotionally vulnerable time in my own life, and I had good reasons to read it.  I was interested, but it was a meaningful book to two people I’m close to, so it helped me connect with them.  

[Teaching3bears]

9 minutes ago, Lecka said:

I have only read “Into the Wild,” and it’s an emotionally tough book.  
 

I actively don’t read emotionally tough books at times when it would not be good for my own mental/emotional state.  
 

I would actively decide not to read a book that was upsetting me.  
 

I can either choose not to read it, or choose to take a break and read it at another time in my life.  
 

Into the Wild has some parts that have stayed with me, I can see this author being that way.  
 

I would not read Into the Wild if I were in any kind of emotionally vulnerable time in my own life, and I had good reasons to read it.  I was interested, but it was a meaningful book to two people I’m close to, so it helped me connect with them.  

I read Into the Wild and I really liked it.  It did stay with me but it was not negative.  The main character had admirable qualities.  This book is about people who have such negative qualities.  If the book has that same effect if sticking with you, then I really should not read it.

[EKS]

I tried to read that book twice, got halfway through and didn't finish it either time.  I can't remember exactly why.  I loved Into the Wild, and Into Thin Air kept me reading, but Under the Banner of Heaven just didn't do it for me. 

[wintermom]

I can't read books without some hope of happier things to come. Unless it's a topic I'm particularly interested in, or someone's personal story, I'll stop reading or avoid the book altogether. There are enough sources in the world for bad news, I like to read more about promising news. 

[prairiewindmomma]

I wouldn’t continue. It’s about how abusers work within a system designed to protect them…and that system was designed by abusers from the foundation of the religion. While good people can live good lives within the system, those who desire to abuse find plenty of opportunity and little recourse. 
 

IMO, one of the things never-Mormons dont necessarily get is how very well the book and Hulu movie capture aspects of the culture. It’s dead on—everyone know chiropractors in Utah who some people love and others find creepy, people who are sovereign state political whackos, people who are obsessed with how the world sees them and their holiness—their lack of genuineness and duplicity, women who appear just fine but are living with controlling husbands, people who espouse to value family and follow god but are monsters, people who claim revelation as a means to control others, and so on…. The book is meant to make people feel like they can relate to bits of this and then maybe look at their own lives through a different lens without threatening their sense of safety…after all this is also a true crime story….so they are safe because *this* would never happen to *them*.
 

For those who have lived with abusers, it is super triggering. Put the book down and take care of yourself. 

[KrissiK]

Put it down. I read The book. I didn't love it, but I thought it was interesting.  If you don't like it, move on.