Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

There are two authors listed on the front of this book: Greg Mortenson and David Oliver Relin. Make no mistake, despite the second billing Relin wrote every word with the exception of the first part of the acknowledgments section. So, let's start by talking about Relin. Relin is a "journalist" who admits in the very beginning of this book that he has lost all sense of objectivity, which is fine by me. More importantly he has abandoned any shred of truthfulness, thoroughness, or common sense. These things have been replaced by ecstatic praise, manufactured drama and agonizing detail followed by huge jumps in time. When I first started reading Three Cups of Tea I was bothered by something I couldn't quite put my finger on. There was something off with the whole book. See if you can find what bothered me in the following passage: "He walked on. Maybe it was the architectural perfection of the mountains- the broad set-backs and buttresses of maroon and ochre granite that built, with symphonic intensity, toward the lone soaring finale of their peaks- but despite his weakened state, his lack of food and warm clothing, his poor odds of surviving if he didn't find some of both sometime soon, Mortenson felt strangely content. (pg. 19)" I realized what was wrong somewhere in the second chapter; the book was written like fiction. Not very good fiction either, but that's beside the point. The reason non-fiction authors don't write like this, with soaring detail and clear narrative surrounding a single person, is because it's impossible to do so and still call yourself a non-fiction writer. No one talks like this, ever. There is no interview, no piece of data, no observation that can get you to the type writing found in this book. The only way you can end up with this kind of writing is if you sit in front of a computer and let your imagination go. Once I came to this realization the entire book became suspect. Did Mortenson ever, really, ask Abdul if he looked like a Pakistani? Did he do it multiple times? Or was this a dramatic device intended to tell us that he was becoming more culturally adept as time went on? Were the white soldiers in his division really so immoral, or was that to show that he had stronger moral fiber than other Americans? Was he as destitute as described, or is that to show his obsession and self-sacrifice? Was he really that bold here? That angry there? How enthusiastic was he, really? The book isn't non-fiction; it's at best inspired by real events. This means, basically, that you can't trust anything but the broad outline. Some of the reviews of this book claim that the writing is bad but the story is good. That, in essence, Relin did a disservice to Mortenson. Maybe he did. But Mortenson is far from perfect. He made mistakes. Lots, and lots, and lots of mistakes. Let me list a few of them. 1. He purchased plans, cement, wood, and other supplies for his first school without ever consulting the local community. He didn't ask what kind of school they wanted or needed. He didn't ask if they needed something more than a school (like medical care to keep they're children alive until school time). He didn't ask anything. He just decided that he was going to build a school, for a community that he barely knew, without even getting their consent. He found out soon after that there wasn't even a way to get all of the school supplies he bought to the village. Something anybody from the community could have told him if he just bothered to ask. 2. What kind of idiocy would cause him to go to Waziristan for his second school? Any reasonable human being would realize that if you already have connections, knowledge, and goodwill in Baltistan, and Baltistan still has a desperate need for schools, you should stay in Baltistan and build more schools there. Once the Balti people no longer need any more schools you can use the reputation you've made in that area to branch out. Skipping around everywhere is counterproductive and suspicious. 3. As the CAI grew larger he stubbornly insisted that he remain at the center of everything. The organization, to its detriment, was all about him. He refused to hire any assistants. He refused to delegate leadership or responsibility. He insisted on meeting with everyone himself, and on personally visiting every single project. He even risked his life to go to Afghanistan, while it was still a war zone, without bodyguards, to personally meet with someone. If you want an organization to last you must have the goal of making its founder increasingly irrelevant. That way it can grow beyond his abilities, and last after his death. These are just a few of his many mistakes. See anything they have in common? They all would have never arisen if Mortenson had involved the Pakistani people more thoroughly. If he had consulted the Korphe villagers, and given them the ultimate decision over what to do with the money, he never would have wasted everyone's time and money with boneheaded decisions. Haji Ali told him, even before he left, that going to Waziristan was a bad idea. If he had listened Mortenson wouldn't have risked his life, and wasted time and money that could have been spend productively. The CAI would have been far more effective if Mortenson had delegated more leadership to some of the Pakistani men and women that he knew and trusted. I don't think Mortenson ever really learned one of Haji Ali's lessons. At one point he was told to sit down and shut up. Maybe he should have stretched that idea farther than he did. Mortenson's story is the story of a well intentioned American helping people who desperately wanted help. But it could have been the story of Pakistani people helping each other, with an American acting as the catalyst. If he had listened more from the beginning, and stepped aside when the time was right, the CAI could have been far more effective, lasting, and culturally appropriate than it is now. I'm not saying that Mortenson is some kind of villain. He's beloved for a reason. He tried to help when so many others do nothing. But he's not as heroic as many people think, and he certainly shouldn't be held up as a model for how to make a difference. We should aspire not to be like Mortenson, but to be better than him. We can learn from his mistakes. Don't go to a place thinking you know what's best. Don't try to do everything yourself. Give ultimate power to the local community; they are the ones who stand to gain, and lose, the most. Always look for an opportunity to step aside. And, finally, if someone tries to write a book about you make sure they're actually good at it. And that they'll donate the proceeds to your cause; only 7% of the profits from this book are donated, the rest is pocketed by Relin.