Book Review: "Heaven Up Here"

[Russell C McGregor]

I had the privilege of reading this book a number of years ago, in electronic format. I don't know how closely the version I read matches the published version, but here are my impressions of it.
 
There is a tendency for people to praise books critical of the Church of Jesus Christ for their "honesty," with the subtle insinuation that more positive views are somehow less honest. A number of people, not kindly disposed towards the Church, have offered that praise to this book. However, in this instance, I am inclined to agree. I think the book is indeed an honest one, if only for the reason that, to informed Latter-day Saints, it shows the author in a highly unflattering light; which is not usually a symptom of fabrication.
 
In the popular LDS phrase, a missionary is encouraged to "lose himself" (or herself) "in the work." I have never seen a missionary reminiscence in which the work was more palpably lost in the missionary. So much of the book is dominated by expositions of the author's internal state (often literally, as he treats us to medically detailed descriptions of his digestive woes) that it is easy to forget that any actual missionary work is even happening.
 
Heaven Up Here is, in large measure, a story of outraged privilege. We are never allowed to forget the author's connection to the first generation of the Church, and the impression that he somehow deserves better treatment because of his ancestry is never far away. In the end, we are left with the clear sense that the Church cruelly abused this missionary by expecting his pampered American digestive system to cope, for eighteen whole months! with food of considerably better quality than what most of the people around him had to eat for their whole lives.
 
However, those people are rarely of very great importance. They are largely extras in a show that has been written, produced and directed by its star performer.
 
Perhaps the most disappointing episode recounted in the book was the case of the illiterate cook. The author and his companion had a lady who cooked meals for them. (Doesn't everybody?) The quality of her cooking was not great, and the author subsequently found out why: she couldn't read. Thus, she couldn't follow a recipe, and simply guessed what ingredients to use, and what their quantities should be.

One can easily see how disastrous such cooking efforts would be; but once Elder Williams found the cause of the problem, he had an opportunity to devise a solution that would not only provide him and his companion with nutritious, palatable meals, but also benefit the lady and her family. He and his companion could have devised a program of teaching her to cook from the cookbook she was trying to use (after all, non-literate people are often very adept at memorising information and procedures) and, extending from that, how to read. This would have been a win-win solution. Here was a chance for Elder Williams to make a difference to his cook and her family; a chance to do some meaningful service (and even personally benefit thereby!) A chance, in Tolkein's words, to "show his quality."

So what did he do?

He fired her, and engaged another cook instead.

Without a word of apology or regret, he looked after el numero uno. Nothing could be more important than this American princeling's pampered tummy.

Just in case anyone is wondering, I'm not a fan.

[jkwilliams]

Russell,

I respect your perspective on my book, but I would clarify that we didn't "fire" the cook because she was illiterate and made a mistake. We engaged a new cook because the previous one was cutting corners in ways that were causing serious health problems to both of us; she was buying very poor quality food and not following good hygiene in the kitchen (as you no doubt read, we found such fun items as rubber bands and rusty nails in our food). Before we got a new cook, we invited the welfare missionaries over to help clean the kitchen and teach this sister how to cook safe food for us; the sisters spent an entire day cleaning the kitchen and another 2 days teaching her about water purification and clean cooking. Unfortunately, she wasn't willing to keep it up, and we found someone who would cook better, safer food for less money. I know, that was pretty heartless of us. And when someone is full of parasites and down to 115 lbs, that is not merely a "pampered tummy" at stake.

Edited September 8, 2015 by jkwilliams

[jkwilliams]

I should also say that I'm not bothered if people have a negative reaction to what I did on my mission. I wanted to write what happened as I experienced it as honestly as I could and let readers come to their own conclusions. I am fine with people reacting negatively. I wasn't perfect at 19, and I'm not now.

[CA Steve]

So what did he do?

He fired her, and engaged another cook instead.

Without a word of apology or regret, he looked after el numero uno. Nothing could be more important than this American princeling's pampered tummy.

Just in case anyone is wondering, I'm not a fan.

Yeah because obviously the mission president has no responsibility to monitor the health of his missionaries, so we can characterize a 19 year old in a foreign country trying to figure out a way to say alive as a "pampered" American instead of a young adult  in a totally new environment dealing with a difficult situation without adequate leadership.

[jkwilliams]

Yeah because obviously the mission president has no responsibility to monitor the health of his missionaries, so we can characterize a 19 year old in a foreign country trying to figure out a way to say alive as a "pampered" American instead of a young adult  in a totally new environment dealing with a difficult situation without adequate leadership.

I don't blame my mission president. He himself was quite ill the last few months of his mission. He did the best he could, as did my companion and I, no matter what anyone says.

[jkwilliams]

My wife's comment after reading Russell's comment (she was one of the hermanas who tried to help our cook): "If someone is criticizing you and [companion] for taking care of your health, he must be an idiot. Just ignore him."

[CA Steve]

I don't blame my mission president. He himself was quite ill the last few months of his mission. He did the best he could, as did my companion and I, no matter what anyone says.

Sorry but I don't agree. I read your book and , having served in a mission close to yours just a few years before, I know what impact a mission president and his wife can and cannot have on a missionary's health, especially since I was involved in the mission home monitoring the health of missionaries for the last quarter of my mission. You mission president or his wife or the assistants under his direction should have been a lot more involved in the health of the missionaries on your mission. What you went though was not acceptable and the people who should have monitored your health, didn't.

[jkwilliams]

Sorry but I don't agree. I read your book and , having served in a mission close to yours just a few years before, I know what impact a mission president and his wife can and cannot have on a missionary's health, especially since I was involved in the mission home monitoring the health of missionaries for the last quarter of my mission. You mission president or his wife or the assistants under his direction should have been a lot more involved in the health of the missionaries on your mission. What you went though was not acceptable and the people who should have monitored your health, didn't.

Well, I guess I am forgiving of him because he was pretty ill, as I said. In hindsight, I think he could and should have let Salt Lake know how bad things were, but he didn't. When our new MP came in, he immediately did a survey over a couple of months and determined that, of 270 missionaries, around 60-80 were too ill to work at any given time, meaning that half the companionships were not not working on any given day. He did some things to improve our health and safety, but I don't think he was well-prepared for what we faced.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

My wife's comment after reading Russell's comment (she was one of the hermanas who tried to help our cook): "If someone is criticizing you and [companion] for taking care of your health, he must be an idiot. Just ignore him."

I always get a kick out of contrasting the tone and content of the valiant defender Russell against that of the evil apostate John.

[jkwilliams]

I always get a kick out of contrasting the tone and content of the valiant defender Russell against that of the evil apostate John.

My wife is convinced that Russell is an anti-Mormon in disguise. I'm not kidding, either.

[Russell C McGregor]

My wife is convinced that Russell is an anti-Mormon in disguise. I'm not kidding, either.

 

It's a good thing you don't have an established track record of making provably false accusations in order to demonise your opponents and represent yourself as a victim...

[jkwilliams]

It's a good thing you don't have an established track record of making provably false accusations in order to demonise your opponents and represent yourself as a victim...

Who said anything about victims?

ETA: You've earned a major eye-roll from my wife.

Edited September 9, 2015 by jkwilliams

[SeekingUnderstanding]

It's a good thing you don't have an established track record of making provably false accusations in order to demonise your opponents...

Like misrepresenting the facts surrounding the firing of John's cook and the length of his mission? Or In the other thread misrepresenting that rockpond hadn't disclosed his support of gay marriage to his bishop?

[jkwilliams]

Like misrepresenting the facts surrounding the firing of John's cook and the length of his mission? Or In the other thread misrepresenting that rockpond hadn't disclosed his support of gay marriage to his bishop?

I missed that, but yes, although I was called for eighteen months, I extended my mission to 24 months. Maybe Russell quit reading before that part. I honestly don't recognize my mission or my book in his description, but as I said, I'm fine with people coming to their own conclusions. I didn't write the book to try and make myself look good.

[Russell C McGregor]

Like misrepresenting the facts surrounding the firing of John's cook and the length of his mission?

 

Yes, I made so many representations about the length of John's mission. What did I misrepresent about the firing of his cook?

Or In the other thread misrepresenting that rockpond hadn't disclosed his support of gay marriage to his bishop?

I'm not going to relitigate another thread here. But I'm confident I misrepresented nothing.

[jkwilliams]

Yes, I made so many representations about the length of John's mission. What did I misrepresent about the firing of his cook?

You said she was fired because she was illiterate and made a mistake because she couldn't read a recipe. That's not true at all, but I suppose it served your narrative of the coddled princeling whining his way through Bolivia.

I'm not going to relitigate another thread here. But I'm confident I misrepresented nothing.

Yeah, I wouldn't call a lie a misrepresentation, either.

[Teancum]

It's a good thing you don't have an established track record of making provably false accusations in order to demonise your opponents and represent yourself as a victim...

Oh oh. I prophecy this thread is on its way to being shut down.

[ttribe]

Oh oh. I prophecy this thread is on its way to being shut down.

 

Which would be a shame because, until Russell once again reverted to form with his penchant for ham-fisted rhetoric and personal insults, the thread was just fine.

[jkwilliams]

Which would be a shame because, until Russell once again reverted to form with his penchant for ham-fisted rhetoric and personal insults, the thread was just fine.

I don't mind the rhetoric and insults, but I draw the line at dishonesty.

[Teancum]

Which would be a shame because, until Russell once again reverted to form with his penchant for ham-fisted rhetoric and personal insults, the thread was just fine.

Indeed. Russell's behavior IMO on this thread at minimum should get him banned from the thread .

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Apologies to John for helping the derail. On topic, I really enjoyed the book. I felt that the representation was very true to life. To Russell's comments on the quality of missionary John was, I agree he was not perfect, but based on my experience he would have been a good bit better than average on my mission.

[jkwilliams]

Apologies to John for helping the derail. On topic, I really enjoyed the book. I felt that the representation was very true to life. To Russell's comments on the quality of missionary John was, I agree he was not perfect, but based on my experience he would have been a good bit better than average on my mission.

Thank you. Of course I wasn't perfect. No one is. The book is what it is: my experience as seen through the eyes of a naive and kind of stupid 19-year-old kid. I wouldn't even say I was any better than anyone else in my mission.

[Tacenda]

Yes, I made so many representations about the length of John's mission. What did I misrepresent about the firing of his cook?

I'm not going to relitigate another thread here. But I'm confident I misrepresented nothing.

Context matters, as apologists have probably said a million times.

[Stargazer]

It's a good thing you don't have an established track record of making provably false accusations in order to demonise your opponents and represent yourself as a victim...

 

Yeah, whatever, but your assessment of John's book is quite simply overcritical and fault-finding to an extreme, not to mention full of misrepresentation (either inadvertent or intentional).  I'm pretty sure that if the author had not been someone who is currently in the "outs" with the church and critical of the church to boot, your assessment would have been far less negative.  Of course, there's no way for me to know this, so it's just my belief.

 

Understand that I usually appreciate your comments and I sometimes react to your posts by cheering.  But not this time.

 

I got a lot out of this book and found it worthwhile reading -- and even uplifting.

 

I had negative experiences on my mission, including with my next-to-last companion, that if I had written about them you might have been tempted to make similar observations.  If I had been jkwilliiams.

[Stargazer]

 

Yes, I made so many representations about the length of John's mission. What did I misrepresent about the firing of his cook?

I'm not going to relitigate another thread here. But I'm confident I misrepresented nothing.

 

John described the incident with the cook in response to your post.  Didn't you read it?  You left out critical details that demonstrated that you glossed over important details, thus misrepresenting the incident.  It was not a simple matter of illiteracy and a one time bad meal leading to a heartless firing.  That's how you characterized it, but that isn't what happened.

 

You're entitled to your opinions, but you're not entitled to your own facts.