Response: "Three Cups of Deceit"

Given that I write just as much fiction as nonfiction, Krakauer’s Three Cups of Deceit made for interesting reading. I’m going to take a cue from Nikki here and split my response up under headings.

Deceit by the numbers

In exploring the scope of Greg Mortenson’s deception, Krakauer frequently references hard figures. He gestures to the diversity of those who donated to the CAI—from President Obama ($100,000), to school kids ($2.5 million, donated in pennies), to himself ($75,000). He cites the lengthy presence of Three Cups of Tea on the NYT bestseller list—four years and two months, as of March 2011—as well as the number of books in print (~5 million). Krakauer’s study of the CAI’s finances adds at least a dozen more figures to his analysis.

On the other hand, he also looks to less quantifiable measures of Mortenson’s deceit, like the experiences of the disillusioned CAI employees and Pakistani villagers. For me, there was a lesson in how Krakauer wove these elements together into one cohesive argument.

The men (and women?) behind the myth

In my first post, I mentioned the breadth of Krakauer’s research. Among those sources: photographs, financial reports, personal letters, articles from popular magazines and academic journals, excerpts from Mortenson’s works, and interviews with individuals like Pakistani scholars and the president of a charity watchdog group.

But a voice that I felt was noticeably absent? That of Mortenson’s co-author and ghostwriters.

Mortenson’s co-author for Three Cups of Tea, David Oliver Relin, appears in the “Dramatis Personae” list but is only mentioned twice in the Krakauer piece. Same goes for Stones into Schools ghostwriter Kevin Fedarko, though he did get an interesting footnote (#8) that confirmed his rather “blindfolded” role: He had to assume Mortenson’s story was true, and he wasn’t responsible for any fact-checking.

I found myself really wanting to know more about these writers, given how important they were to forming Mortenson’s “creation myth,” as Krakauer calls it. Were they all as unwitting as Fedarko? If not, did they have any misgivings about presenting fiction under the guise of fact?



Fact into fiction

I have to wonder, how would Mortenson’s book have fared if it had been sold as pure fiction? Or perhaps as a novel with a “based on a true story” label? I haven’t read Three Cups of Tea, so I hesitate to make any judgment, but I think it’s important to discuss the critical choice Mortenson made in labeling Three Cups of Tea as nonfiction.

Another issue of interest: How (according to Krakauer) the Bozai school was built to satisfy a narrative thread in Stones to Schools.

Miscellaneous observations

- Both Sarah and Robyn have commented on Krakauer’s pattern of presenting Mortenson’s fictionalized accounts and then systematically dismantling them. Did anyone notice his speedy transition phrases in between? I feel like these were part of the pattern, and that they added to his voice in the piece. For example:

“This is what actually happened after Mortenson abandoned his attempt on K2.” (7)

“The entire story was fabricated.” (15)

“[This account] also happens to be fictitious.” (32)

“Such claims are patently untrue…” (48)

“[Mortenson’s sacred pledge] turned out to be a whopper…” (55)

- On the topic of word choice: I found it notable that “lie”/“lies”/“lying” appeared so few times in the story. Krakauer instead uses terms like “contradicted,” “fabricated,” and of course, “deceit.” (Though this meant that when a permutation of the word “lie” actually did appear, it really felt strong and jumped off the page for me.)

- I’m not sure if it was intentional foreshadowing, but I definitely thought back to this passage when Mortenson stops speaking to Krakauer just ten pages later:

“Greg is hot and cold,” Callahan remarks philosophically. “When you’ve got his attention you can expect huge email traffic, long phone calls—and then he’ll just kind of disappear and go silent.” (59)

- And maybe Krakauer’s fact-checking is rubbing off on me, but I really want to find out if the 1979 issue of Time actually contained an ad for a WaterPik Oral Hygiene Appliance…