New O'Reilly Children's Book

[Dan Pearson]

I always liked Jim Bishops self-analysis of "The Day Lincoln Was Shot" in his memoir, "A Bishop's Confession." To paraphrase, he called it "a pile of excrement." And ditto times five on "Twenty Days." It was the first Lincoln book I bought as a teen.

[RJNorton]

Dan, I first saw Bishop's own description of his book in Dr. Hanchett's Lincoln Murder Conspiracies. It surprised me and still does. Along with Twenty Days that book got me hooked on the assassination in the 1960's. I still refer to Bishop's book often, especially if I am looking for a general time frame for a certain event on April 14. Generally speaking, I think Bishop got the majority of things right. If you compare the times in Bishop's book with the times given in a more scholarly work devoted to that last day (like Dr. Reck's) more often than not they will be in general agreement.

[LincolnMan]

Bishop said that about his own book???

[Donna McCreary]

I have one of those memorial prints from 1865 depicting the box at Ford's Theatre. Even though it is an orginial engraving from an orginial piece of art work, it is still just that -- art work. The artists sketched Booth wearing a hat. Mary Lincoln wears a bonnet and an appropiate dress for the theatre. The cover of this book shows Mary as the modern eye remembers her -- wearing a ball gown and a floral head dress. She would not have worn such attire to the theatre. Off the shoulder gowns with trains were reserved for extreme formal occassions - balls, receptions, state dinners. Floral head dresses were usually worn to events that included dancing. A bonnet could be worn inside the theatre, although some women removed them and had a simple ribbon head dress or a jeweled head dress under the bonnet. Yes, gloves were worn by men and women at all times -- except when eating. Gloves protected people from dirt. Mary often had to remind Lincoln to carry an extra pair of gloves with him in case the pair he was wearing became soiled.
Do we know the exact seating arrangment in the theatre box? Most images show Lincoln on the far left side (when inside the box, not the image itself); however, the engraving I have has Mary on the extreme left. Etiquette required the lady have the 'inside' seat - thus Mary should have been seated to the far left against the wall.

[L Verge]

Evidently etiquette was not followed by the Fords on the night of April 14. If one were standing in the entryway behind the Presidential party, Lincoln's rocker was nearest to the left wall, then a side chair for Mary right next to the President. Clara was on a side chair beside Mary, and Rathbone was actually on the settee, which was placed at an angle on the far right.

[L Verge]

I purchased O'Reilly's "children's" book, Lincoln's Last Days, online for about $11, and it arrived today. As has been said here before, the front cover alone will make it hop off the shelf into one's hands. The designer knows that the cover is all-important to getting a customer lured into buying.

The wealth of period illustrations inside is also a significant plus. Including various appendices and the index, it is over 300 pages.

That said, it appears to be aimed at Grades 5-8 and carries that through nicely by using present tense to make it more appealing, spacing the lines of text so that it is easily read, scattering the illustrations throughout the book to make sure they are on or near the appropriate subjects they are illustrating, and including an opening note that describes the Key Players and appendices that include Lincoln's World (with a walk through D.C. of the 1860s), a section on the Lincoln family, important facts about the Civil War, sections on Civil War weapons, flags, transportation, and medicine, a Lincoln Timeline, and more.

Now for the sad part: IMO, the 240 pages of text makes it a little long for the average student to want to read. My twelve-year-old grandson could give tours at Surratt House and loves James Swanson's Chasing Mr. Lincoln's Killer - but I doubt he would ever finish this book. Mistakes are still there in watered-down versions of what was stumbled over in Killing Lincoln, and this is what made me the worst mad!

Killing Lincoln got panned from the very beginning for its style and substance. From amateur historians to the academicians, the authors and publishers heard about the errors. They had time to listen and to correct these errors in this book -- and they didn't. Do publishers even have fact checkers and editors in their employ anymore? I used to get several calls a year from such people checking on the reliability of manuscripts and articles that had been submitted for publication. I don't anymore. There is also a little thing known as peer review; is that ever used?

O'Reilly claims to have once been a high school history teacher. To have flubbed up on the original book says a lot, but to have been admonished about your "teaching" of history and turn around within six months and produce a student's version that still has silly errors is unforgivable in the eyes of this old middle school teacher of history and government (who also sat on several textbook review panels in her day).

You have now earned two C-'s in my book, Mr. O'Reilly and Henry Holt & Company.

[BettyO]

Amen, Laurie!

While the book is glossy and beautiful to look at, and the inclusion of the rare and wonderful period illustrations are grand -- the same historical errors carry throughout the book... why?

The editors and authors obviously knew what was wrong and still perpetuate the errors! Inexcusable!

[John W]

The O'Reilly books should sell very at the gift shop. They are among the most popular Lincoln books of this century. They are not a disortation. Their histology is history as narrative, High story, more specifically as the dust cover points out history as thriller. Thrillers rarely have footnotes or reveal all the facts. I too liked the depiction of Sailor’s Creek. I listened to the book.The short chapters with intriguing endings made it a good listen for a long ride.

[Jim Garrett]

The devil is in the details. They have the Ulke picture, however it is the negative. Everything is reversed!

[GARY POPOLO]

(08-21-2012 11:40 AM)BettyO Wrote:  It's glossy, it has new and relevant photos - but is it STILL O'Reilly's brand of "history" ?!?!

The new O'Reilly children's book, Lincoln's Last Days, is beautiful to look at....(LOVE the cover) - but is what's inside relevant and "historian friendly?"

That remains to be seen. I've ordered a copy - and will report later.....

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Hello Betty O, I bought the book about a month ago and have to say it was very good. It was as good as the original O'Reilly book Lincoln's last Days except on a childs level. It was well written and both relevant and historian friendly. Believe me you will enjoy reading this book. Good Reading Gary

[Gene C]

I looked at a copy at Wal-Mart. Great photo's and illustrations. I almost purchased it just for that.

[GARY POPOLO]

Was just reading posts on O'Reily's Children's Killing Lincoln and have to say that I believe alot of you think that because the book may not be true in all its facts that it may not be worth reading. To that I say you would be wrong. Just getting our young poeple to READ and think about something other than video games is a wonderful thing. I don't mean to say that books should not be as factual as possible but sometimes just reading for the pleasure of reading and letting their imagination go to work. I have read the book and found it very entertaining and yes it may not be the best book on Lincoln but, it kept me wanting to continue reading. And after all isn't that what we all love doing? We read for both facts and the enjoyment of just reading. Gary P.

[LincolnMan]

Gary: Good point. The book could be the very means by which a lot of young people cathch the "spark"-the love of history-and specifically the history of Lincoln. Who knows, maybe a future scholar who someday credit the reading of the book as the start of an interest in Lincoln.

[wsanto]

(01-01-2013 07:42 PM)John W Wrote:  The O'Reilly books should sell very at the gift shop. They are among the most popular Lincoln books of this century. They are not a disortation. Their histology is history as narrative, High story, more specifically as the dust cover points out history as thriller. Thrillers rarely have footnotes or reveal all the facts. I too liked the depiction of Sailor’s Creek. I listened to the book.The short chapters with intriguing endings made it a good listen for a long ride.

I too enjoyed listening to Bill O'Reilly read the original book to me during a long car ride. I am sure to enjoy the NatGeo docudrama based on the book as well. If it is as entertaining as the book it will surely bring along a lot more interest in Lincoln and the story of his assassination.

[Gene C]

The problem with the O'Reilly book is that with a little more effort, it could have been better. There were mistakes they chose not to correct. I was displeased with his treatment of Booth's relationship with Lucy Hale. Considering O'Reilly's reputation, these things disappointed me. With all the hype, he set high standards, and he didn't quite meet them.

On the flip side, Jim Bishop's book the Day Lincoln Was Shot, had mistakes in it also, (It's been so long since I read it, I can't tell you what they are) but it got many of us interested in this subject. Hopefully O'Reilly's book will get a new generation hooked.