Three Cups of Deceit: How Greg Mortenson, Humanitarian Hero, Lost His Way in Around the World in 80 Books

May 12, 2015 Ginger rated it it was ok

Shelves: cultural-studies

I'm a great proponent of the saying, "There's my story. There's your story. And then there's the truth."

And I am a big, big fan of Jon Krakauer. Along with most of America, I read Greg Mortenson's Three Cups of Tea when I was working for the local school board not long after it came to popularity in the mid-2000s. Naturally, we were all big fans of this amazing story of education piercing the darkness.

Of course, I'm pretty cynical, or as I like to think of it, realistic, so I understand a little I'm a great proponent of the saying, "There's my story. There's your story. And then there's the truth."

And I am a big, big fan of Jon Krakauer. Along with most of America, I read Greg Mortenson's Three Cups of Tea when I was working for the local school board not long after it came to popularity in the mid-2000s. Naturally, we were all big fans of this amazing story of education piercing the darkness.

Of course, I'm pretty cynical, or as I like to think of it, realistic, so I understand a little exaggeration for dramatic effect when I see it. Mortenson was clearly weaving a story, for a purpose, and that purpose was to envoke emotion.

This is where Krakauer and I see things a little differently. He is looking at all "non-fiction" through his journalistic lens, and Three Cups of Tea would generously be described I think as literary non-fiction.

But don't for one minute think that Krakauer is immune to emotion. This whole book is reactionary from the start. I made a note in my (Kindle) "margin" that Krakauer seemed so angry, long before Krakauer admits to being personally "mortified" at having been an early supporter and champion of Mortenson.

That seemed to be the key of it. He felt duped. He says at one point, "I felt ashamed at being so easily conned." For a man who has made a career out of calling folks out, this one seemed a bit blinded by personal emotions.

I found many examples of conjecture, opinion adjectives, and worst of all, unsourced "facts." There were multiple times I jotted "source??" in the margin. One of the most serious cases of accusation, where Krakauer implied that Mortenson asked villagers to lie for him in a documentary concerning a when a bridge was built was given no quote, no letter, no email support from a villager. He simply stated the story as fact. I'm not saying I don't believe these facts, and it is certainly a shame if they are true, but I just didn't have any way at all to believe his story over Mortenson's. It seemed one man's word (who was personally present), over another man's (who, as far as I could tell, interviewed a few of the participating parties, but maddeningly, almost never sourced where he got the material from).

He seemed to get bogged down in the details, especially of when Mortenson met particular people. He quotes Mortenson himself once that supports and sums up his feelings on the sweeping narrative: "I'm a storyteller. Facts or dates or times are really not too important to me." Yes, it establishes pattern, but if I'm a charitable donor to a cause I believe in, I certainly don't expect the founder to remember the month accurately of when he met a particular friend ten years ago. It simply didn't matter to me, yet Krakauer spent at least 90% of the book establishing detail after detail after detail in 3CT that were inaccurate in timeline. I just didn't care.

Krakauer seemed to take great exception to the fact that Mortenson, rather than CAI profitted from his book, Three Cups of Tea, whereas I, unless specifically stated otherwise, assume that the author is making money off his own book.

When he finally got to the more important aspects of wasteful spending, I almost understood more, not less, how Mortenson could be so careless. I'll agree that where there is smoke, there is often fire. And where there is this much smoke, there is most certainly fire, but Mortenson is clearly a big-picture guy, someone who is reprehensibly bad at details yes, but I don't believe him to be a conniving, thieving shyster, but more a irresponsible and excitable visionary who is in desperate need of a good, firm secretary or a realistically harsh accountant. Some of this I even wondered if it was a reaction to necessary disorganization in countries that don't have our Western views on detailed contracts, for example. Mortenson should be the face, not the head of CAI, certainly. But this level of vitrol from Krakauer, I found, disappointing, and a waste of time.

None of it, even the excessive waste, takes away from the good that this man accomplished. I wish he had done it in a different way, certainly, but its more than most of us will do in a lifetime. It is no small feat.

Skip unless you are a regular donor to CAI and need the full story. Integrity is important, certainly. Wrong is wrong. But may this story be a warning call to us all to be diligent in our research when it comes to charities and determine to remain uncynical amidst rare cases like this.

...more

4 likes · Like · see review